PDA

View Full Version : Glad the dirt season is coming to an end


tennis_hand
06-07-2008, 08:29 PM
Every year I pray this. The surface is just not pleasing to the eyes.

Nadal_Freak
06-07-2008, 08:32 PM
Yes *******s probably wouldn't enjoy seeing Fed get owned. Fed is actually a very good clay courter but Nadal has the answer for Fed.

Mansewerz
06-07-2008, 08:46 PM
Yes *******s probably wouldn't enjoy seeing Fed get owned. Fed is actually a very good clay courter but Nadal has the answer for Fed.

And *********s must crawl back into their little holes until next year.

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 08:48 PM
LOL.good response.This is the time of year when the Nadalettes enjoy their little moment.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 08:49 PM
Yes *******s probably wouldn't enjoy seeing Fed get owned. Fed is actually a very good clay courter but Nadal has the answer for Fed.

If hypocritical *******s like yourself got their way, the clay-court season wouldn't be over until after Wimbledon, because Wimbledon would basically be green clay. Oh wait, it already basically is. See Federer S&V-ing less now than in '03, and good grass-courters being knocked out before the QF with clay-court specialists getting that far.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 08:51 PM
btw, Federer had a 65-50 edge in winners over Nadal at that Wimbledon.

Face it, he is just the more talented player, period. Grass should exemplify that, but it's been ruined.

Whatever they can do to get more S&V, they should do. They better get rid of this crappy horribly excuse for grass, and put in fast low-bouncing grass.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 08:53 PM
I don't know, but I think Federer came into the net more at the '08 and '07 AO than at Wimbledon in '07. That's horrible. Awful. It obvioiusly reflects on how they've ruined their unique surface.

If this keeps up, I'm going to have to rank Wimbledon as an insignificant slam.

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 08:56 PM
Me too DH.I am curious to see how it will fare this year.The rallies last year where insane.The fact that Ferrero took a set from Roger at wimbledon is ridiculous.

Mansewerz
06-07-2008, 08:57 PM
And how far do guys like Radek Stepanek get?

caesar66
06-07-2008, 09:08 PM
Every year I pray this. The surface is just not pleasing to the eyes.

I love how the OP posts something that refers to neither nadal or fed, then the trolls just come out to play. I'm also happy to see the dirt go away, but I'm happy to see any tennis on tv, including clay.

my_forehand
06-07-2008, 09:14 PM
The problem for me with clay courts is not really seeing the ball all too well.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 09:19 PM
And *********s must crawl back into their little holes until next year.

Hopefully next month. Surely the ignorant AELTC won't try to pull a stunt like that again!

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 09:20 PM
I played on clay many times.Its demanding but its good on the body.Its not like hard courts which effect your joints.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 09:21 PM
btw, Federer had a 65-50 edge in winners over Nadal at that Wimbledon.

Face it, he is just the more talented player, period. Grass should exemplify that, but it's been ruined.

Whatever they can do to get more S&V, they should do. They better get rid of this crappy horribly excuse for grass, and put in fast low-bouncing grass.

He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

Stchamps
06-07-2008, 09:21 PM
I love how the OP posts something that refers to neither nadal or fed, then the trolls just come out to play. I'm also happy to see the dirt go away, but I'm happy to see any tennis on tv, including clay.

Seriously. After reading what the OP posted I was thinking of how ugly red clay is (it reminds me of red clay in South Carolina), but people just assumed that the OP is a Fed fan.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:24 PM
And *********s must crawl back into their little holes until next year.

Actually no, cos the grass is just fine thanks. Nadal will do well again this year. He's also improved on hardcourts so get used to it pal.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:25 PM
Seriously. After reading what the OP posted I was thinking of how ugly red clay is (it reminds me of red clay in South Carolina), but people just assumed that the OP is a Fed fan.

Let's be real here, he is most likely one. If not, then he's a fan of American bash tennis.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:26 PM
Me too DH.I am curious to see how it will fare this year.The rallies last year where insane.The fact that Ferrero took a set from Roger at wimbledon is ridiculous.

I dunno, Fed got smacked by Fish on hardcourt, so go figure.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:27 PM
Yes *******s probably wouldn't enjoy seeing Fed get owned. Fed is actually a very good clay courter but Nadal has the answer for Fed.

As provoking your post was, it is the honest truth why they don't like it. They get angry just hearing that but deep down that is the case.

Vision84
06-07-2008, 09:28 PM
If hypocritical *******s like yourself got their way, the clay-court season wouldn't be over until after Wimbledon, because Wimbledon would basically be green clay. Oh wait, it already basically is. See Federer S&V-ing less now than in '03, and good grass-courters being knocked out before the QF with clay-court specialists getting that far.

If they had their way only clay would exist.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 09:33 PM
He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

He's won all of their non-clay meetings for the last several years.

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 09:36 PM
Nadal should be more worried about Djoker gaining up on him.Djoker is an all-court player, something that Nadal i still searching for when it comes to all the slams!

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:36 PM
He's won all of their non-clay meetings for the last several years.

If you mean several years as in Dubai 2006 I guess that's quite a way to look at it.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 09:37 PM
Nadal should be more worried about Djoker gaining up on him.Djoker is an all-court player, something that Nadal i still searching for when it comes to all the slams!

You should worry about him too, especially in the hardcourt slams.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 09:48 PM
He's won all of their non-clay meetings for the last several years.

When you admitted you hadn't seen Edberg and Rafter's volley I ceased taking you seriously as a poster.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 09:48 PM
If you mean several years as in Dubai 2006 I guess that's quite a way to look at it.

Yea, when there's a significant turn-around in a rivalry, a clear dividing line, that is a reasonable way to look at it. Sort of like when Federer started beating Nalbandian most of the time, or Hewitt, or Agassi, etc.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 09:50 PM
You should worry about him too, especially in the hardcourt slams.

And hope Roger doesn't run into Fish at Wimbledon while you're at it!

dh003i
06-07-2008, 09:58 PM
And hope Roger doesn't run into Fish at Wimbledon while you're at it!

Right, because he can't have slump, after 4 years of essentially getting to the final of almost every event he entered. One can hardly name all the players Nadal has lost to on HC.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:04 PM
When you admitted you hadn't seen Edberg and Rafter's volley I ceased taking you seriously as a poster.

I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

Morrissey
06-07-2008, 10:06 PM
Yea, when there's a significant turn-around in a rivalry, a clear dividing line, that is a reasonable way to look at it. Sort of like when Federer started beating Nalbandian most of the time, or Hewitt, or Agassi, etc.

You mean as in the losing 6-10 h2h turnaround?

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:14 PM
You mean as in the losing 6-10 h2h turnaround?

Again, I'm talking about HC.

Up to and including RG 2006, it was 6-1 Nadal, 2-1 on HC.

After RG 2006, it is 5-4 Federer, 2-0 on grass, 2-0 on HC, 1-4 on clay.

That's a pretty obvious turn-around outside of clay. Nadal is obviously helped out by Federer making just about every clay-court final he makes, and him not usually meeting Federer in the HC finals. I'm sorry if you can't see reality, but that's it.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 10:15 PM
Right, because he can't have slump, after 4 years of essentially getting to the final of almost every event he entered. One can hardly name all the players Nadal has lost to on HC.

Maybe we should discuss this at another time. Your tone is becoming downright hostile, especially that post calling me imbecile. Sleep on it. Let me know what you decide!

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 10:16 PM
I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

You're backtracking and you call me deceitful?

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 10:19 PM
I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

Exactly! I never watched Rod Laver, Lew Hoad, Don Budge, et al. I would never say what Nadal could do as opposed to them. You see what I'm saying? I would feel like an imbecile making a claim like that!

P.S.-Are you saying you watched Edberg and skipped Rafter?

TennisandMusic
06-07-2008, 10:24 PM
btw, Federer had a 65-50 edge in winners over Nadal at that Wimbledon.

Face it, he is just the more talented player, period. Grass should exemplify that, but it's been ruined.

Whatever they can do to get more S&V, they should do. They better get rid of this crappy horribly excuse for grass, and put in fast low-bouncing grass.

You know those winners include aces right? Off the ground Nadal was superior, and I believe Federer himself alluded to that...

By the way this thread is ridiculous.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:25 PM
You're backtracking and you call me deceitful?

No, I am not back-tracking. I was explaining why you were being deceitful to anyone who didn't see what I'd written. I didn't say I hadn't seen Edberg and Rafter. I said I haven't seen enough of them to make a first-hand comparison. I have seen hundreds of Federer matches (don't know the exact number, but almost everytime one was being broadcast on ESPN, I saw it; also had Wimbledon Live and will have it again; unfortunately, the FO, USO, and AO all are lame and don't have the equivalent of Wimbledon Live). I have not seen hundreds of Edberg matches.

That just means I wasn't interested in tennis when Edberg was playing.

TennisandMusic
06-07-2008, 10:26 PM
You guys really shouldn't care THIS much about who wins or loses...how on earth does this affect your lives?

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 10:26 PM
Nadal should never, i mean never be superior on grass to Federer.Grass has always benefited the offensive playmaker, the shotmaker.Nadal can be a shotmaker but he hardly blast winners like Federer does on a fast court.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:28 PM
Exactly! I never watched Rod Laver, Lew Hoad, Don Budge, et al. I would never say what Nadal could do as opposed to them. You see what I'm saying? I would feel like an imbecile making a claim like that!

P.S.-Are you saying you watched Edberg and skipped Rafter?

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not making any comparisons between Federer and players I haven't seen as much as Federer. I'm simply saying that Federer has great volleys. And if it is true that, compared to Edberg, Becker, Rafter, etc, his volleys come up lacking, that wouldn't cause me to say his volleys aren't great. I'd just say that they're volleys are beyond great.

PS: No, I'm not saying I skipped Rafter...I was just referring to Edberg only to save on typing.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:30 PM
You know those winners include aces right? Off the ground Nadal was superior, and I believe Federer himself alluded to that...

By the way this thread is ridiculous.

Right, aces are a part of the game. And they're the part that is most completely dependent on that player. If he won by acing out every one of his service games, sleeping on return games, and eeking out a tie-breaker, that would be well-deserved, and he'd be the better player.

TheTruth
06-07-2008, 10:31 PM
You guys really shouldn't care THIS much about who wins or loses...how on earth does this affect your lives?

It doesn't. The outcome isn't in our hands, and I never said Rafa will win. I said I hope he wins. I don't remember what post of mine offended him, but he came out of nowhere getting angry and carrying on. Me? I'm in a strange mood so it's funny.

ACE of Hearts
06-07-2008, 10:32 PM
It feels like u talking to blind mice.You would have to be a fool to not notice the high bounces in the finals.The long rallies.Grass is about low bounces and quick points.

dh003i
06-07-2008, 10:35 PM
You guys really shouldn't care THIS much about who wins or loses...how on earth does this affect your lives?

Honestly, I don't care that much about whether he wins...I hope he does, but if not, oh well...he got to another FO final, which is better than everyone save Nadal. I just don't like the hyperbolization of odds given by <some> Nadal fans, and distortion. It was disappointing when Federer lost MC and Hamburg, but ultimately the guy who played better won, and Fed deserved to lose for going away from what was working; but oh well.

babbette
06-07-2008, 11:01 PM
This thread is just nasty and disgusting. Why all this:(
I mean look at this for example. It's in French but well.....
http://roland-garros.france2.fr/index-fr.php?page=videos&id_rubrique=104&id_article=1235

From 2:00 the presenter says to Roger that Rafael has a question for you. He likes you a lot you can tell. Rafael asks "what did you do to get is your game so complete?" Fed shrugs a little and chuckles " well he's also very complete", and then says he doesn't really know how he did it. Had good coaches etc..then goes on to say that people forget that Nadal is not just a clay Courter. Had good results in grass for the past years......Nadal said something like this in his presser too.


Q. Following on this question, he says that if somebody can win Wimbledon against Federer, he says you can. You played a beautiful final, and that you could have won. The match was very close. Other people would think that you're basically a clay court player. What would you say?

RAFAEL NADAL: When people say positive things about you it's always good. It shows that you're doing something good. So I'd like to thank Borg for everything he says about me.

Now, for those who think I'm just a clay player means that they're not watching the other tournaments.

Earlier Rafael was in the show and he was talking Fed up aswell.

sure he doesn't win most of the hardcourts, but he has titles in that surface, he's always a factor in those tournaments and his worst results are quarter finals and semi-finals. Seriously, i don't understand. I too wondered if he was just a clay courter when i first saw him in Roland Garros 2005. Then he won Toronto, China open, Madrid Masters I started to think, mmm, not perfect there yet but maybe can improve, even though the guy won.
Myy point is, anyway, why can't we all just get along?!?!!?!!!!!:cry: Rafael and Roger even text each other, he said in a TTC interview. He just wouldn't say about what because is that kind of private when it comes to life outside of court. Now comeon, people.:cry:

caesar66
06-07-2008, 11:29 PM
the last two pages of this thread have nothing to do with the original post.

tacou
06-07-2008, 11:40 PM
I could only bare to read the first three posts of the thread. First of all, Federer is the second best clay courter by far so I don't know why Fed fans would hate this part of the season. Second, Nadal doesn't become irrelevant for the remainder of the season, far from it, so the rest of you should shove it also. You're all so in love with your favorite player you can't enjoy the sport some times, it's sad.

herosol
06-07-2008, 11:47 PM
my only problem is the lack of variety when it comes to who wins.

It's almost unfair that Nadal keeps winning.
There should be a new rule.

During Clay Court season, players need only 1 set to beat Nadal, where as he needs to win two like usual.

without this, it's pretty much an unfair match.
EVERYTIME

Defcon
06-07-2008, 11:54 PM
There are no clay courts where I live (maybe in some private club which I don't know about), and though I prefer watching hard court tennis, I've never played on clay and would really really like to. So for that reason alone I don't mind clay court tennis, though it does get a bit repetitive at times.

fednad
06-07-2008, 11:54 PM
He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

I think you are a Fed hater

fednad
06-07-2008, 11:57 PM
If you mean several years as in Dubai 2006 I guess that's quite a way to look at it.

Or just like the Hamburg final of 2007 ;)

fednad
06-07-2008, 11:59 PM
the last two pages of this thread have nothing to do with the original post.

That is the story of every thread on this board.

cmb
06-08-2008, 03:53 AM
Right, aces are a part of the game. And they're the part that is most completely dependent on that player. If he won by acing out every one of his service games, sleeping on return games, and eeking out a tie-breaker, that would be well-deserved, and he'd be the better player.

lol I love how people dont like to say that a big server is a good player, the moans are, he just has a serve! lol but a serve is part of tennis, even I dont have a good serve but when I play an indoor match on a fast court, and i lose in a long 3 set match because of a serve, the opponent was the better player on that day because his serve got him out of trouble lol.

I like playing big servers, because you know u are only getting a few chances to win a set, can u win the big points??

fps
06-08-2008, 04:08 AM
i've really enjoyed the clay court season, there's been some really good tennis.

i WISH they'd make the grass court season a little longer, because basically we're gonna have 6 months of hard court after wimbledon...

Zaragoza
06-08-2008, 04:09 AM
Every year I pray this. The surface is just not pleasing to my eyes.

Fixed. By the way the clay (not dirt) season continues. Sorry for that.

Zaragoza
06-08-2008, 04:18 AM
Nadal should be more worried about Djoker gaining up on him.Djoker is an all-court player, something that Nadal i still searching for when it comes to all the slams!

Federer should be worried too, even more than Nadal since Djokovicīs best surface is hardcourts, not clay.
You canīt consider Djokovic on clay better than Nadal on hardcourts. Nadal is a better player on grass at the moment so Nadal is more of an all-court player at the moment.

zagor
06-08-2008, 04:47 AM
He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

Embarrassing? IMO it's not.You say a teenager but some player start their to peak very early like Hewitt,Chang,Couirer,Borg,Seles,Hingis,Capriati etc. ,Nadal falls into that group as he won his first slam in 2005 and was already a great player that year.Federer leads head-to-head against Nadal on non-clay surfaces where he is a better player(he's combined 5-2 against Nadal on those surfaces) and is losing all the time to Nadal on clay where Nadal is a better player.The fact is that Federer is naturally a baseliner and Nadal is a bad match-up for him from the baseline,every player in the history of tennis had a few bad match-ups,Sampras had Krajicek(lost in straight sets to him in his own backayard against him),Korda,Ferreira etc. while Borg had Pannata(the only one who beat him at the FO).Federer would certainly have a more even h-to-h with Nadal if he was losing to a bunch of mediocre players on clay(like Sampras did and strangely he isn't getting any criticism on this forum for it,maybe people forgot but I certainly didn't) instead of facing Nadal in the final all the time.Also adding to the fact Nadal is an early bloomer he is also 5 years younger then Federer so he will be improving all the time while Fed will be getting older and today's slower surfaced baseline oriented game favours younger players(Sampras had some lopsided losses to teenagers like Roddick,Safin and Hewitt when he was past his peak) while Sampras never had to deal with great young phenomens during his prime IMO(maybe Moya but he shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Nadal and Djokovic IMO).

zagor
06-08-2008, 04:51 AM
On the topic,clay is probably me least favourite surface to watch(maybe the fact that in my country we have 95% clay courts add to that feeling) but only slightly as I enjoy watching tennis on all surfaces.

vive le beau jeu !
06-08-2008, 05:28 AM
clay court tennis is certainly my least favorite to play/watch... but i have to admit that the clay court itself is esthetically relatively pleasant. ;)

anyway it will be cool to enjoy some fresh grass, at last !

EDIT:
no, finally i hate this damned brick color, it's very ugly and it sucks like hell. :x

rommil
06-08-2008, 06:49 AM
He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!
Yet who is in the running of becoming the best ever? Nadal's achievement on clay is phenomenal but comparing it to Federer right now, it's all DIRT. I think that's the reason Nadal attracts some fans like you. Anything and everything that comes out of your mouth it's all and about DIRT.

sondraj
06-08-2008, 08:12 AM
If hypocritical *******s like yourself got their way, the clay-court season wouldn't be over until after Wimbledon, because Wimbledon would basically be green clay. Oh wait, it already basically is. See Federer S&V-ing less now than in '03, and good grass-courters being knocked out before the QF with clay-court specialists getting that far.

Oh please *******s wouldn't have a problem with clay if Federer was wining it like everthing else. As soon a Nole takes his wimby title from him you all will start hating it like clay too, oh wait you do because Rafa takes it to him on grass every year. well there's always the hard courts oh wait no the hard courts are being slowed down now as well, so what is a federer fan to do. The greatest player of all time only being able to dominate on hell fast surfaces, hum sounds a lot like a player named Roddick to me.

HoVa
06-08-2008, 10:14 AM
lol... all op said was that it was hard to watch on tv and you idiots argue about nadal and federer.

get a life.