PDA

View Full Version : Australian Open draw out


crazylevity
01-15-2009, 07:56 PM
http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/scores/draws/ms/r1s1.html

djokster
01-15-2009, 07:59 PM
Hewitt's got a tough draw...sucks.

jman
01-15-2009, 08:00 PM
I heard Federer has a tough section.
At least Murray is on Nadal's side.

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 08:11 PM
I heard Federer has a tough section.
At least Murray is on Nadal's side.
Your 2 sentences somehow sound like an oxymoron.

Lion King
01-15-2009, 08:54 PM
Fed seems to have an easy draw. Murray is in Nadal's half, as well as Tsonga. Federer might have to face Nalbandian, Del Potro and Djoko.

RGK
01-15-2009, 08:56 PM
Fed easy draw? Marat is an easy player to win? what the hell is going on here.

phoenicks
01-15-2009, 09:04 PM
Federer really have a damn easy draw, guess he's always favoured by the organizer, look at who nadal have to face in his own half, Murray, Tsonga, Simon, and all the most promising youngsters, Kei nishikori, Ernest gulbis.

Hope that Marat Safin can cause an major upset here like how he upset Djoker in last year Wimbledon. Go, Safin !!!

R_Federer
01-15-2009, 09:04 PM
Safin, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Djokovic are easy? HaHa. I can sese the Nadal fans knowing Federer will win this tournament, hence making up BS like "easy draw for him".

seffina
01-15-2009, 09:07 PM
The real question is if Gulbis's draw is easy?

phoenicks
01-15-2009, 09:12 PM
Safin, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Djokovic are easy? HaHa. I can sese the Nadal fans knowing Federer will win this tournament, hence making up BS like "easy draw for him".

Djoker, del potro and Warwrinka are no match for Murray, Tsonga and Simon, I am sure Fed is having a party to celebrate the easy fraw for him in AO, esp avoiding the RED HOT Murray in his own half.

NamRanger
01-15-2009, 09:15 PM
Djoker, del potro and Warwrinka are no match for Murray, Tsonga and Simon, I am sure Fed is having a party to celebrate the easy fraw for him in AO, esp avoiding the RED HOT Murray in his own half.



Because Djokovic and Nalbandian are so much better -_-

edmondsm
01-15-2009, 09:24 PM
Hewitt's got a tough draw...sucks.

Got to say it. That's what happens when you drop to 74 in the rankings. Hewitt is a fighter, and it really doesn't matter who he's got in front of him these days, it's going to be a battle. Best of luck to him.

edmondsm
01-15-2009, 09:26 PM
It's probably already been said, but Federer has to be happy that Murray is on the other side.

R_Federer
01-15-2009, 09:28 PM
Djoker, del potro and Warwrinka are no match for Murray, Tsonga and Simon, I am sure Fed is having a party to celebrate the easy fraw for him in AO, esp avoiding the RED HOT Murray in his own half.

Umm Marry is ranked 4th. What can Federer do about that? If Murray was to be on Federer's draw then Djokovic would have been on Nadal's. Then you same people would have complained Federer having an easy draw because the defending champ is not in his draw. C'mon total nonsense!

iriraz
01-15-2009, 09:28 PM
Federer has a pretty tricky start playing Seppi,Moya,Safin.It could have been a lot easier but on the other hand it`s hard to expect a lot from these guys.
At least it`s a good draw to get warmed up with.
From the Aussies perspective it was obvious it would be a tough draw for Hewitt.The good news for him is that he is not playing against the top 4 but on the other hand Gonzalez is a tough match.Not beeing seeded really sux,because u can play against a qualifier but also against number 1.
Murray has a tricky draw as well:Pavel in first round is not necessary a walkover,then Granollers,Nishikori/Melzer and then Stepanek/Verdasco.
Nadal`s draw in first 2 rounds is pretty straightforward and in third round he could have a tricky one with Haas.

Arbartrator
01-15-2009, 09:34 PM
Roddick might play Djokovic in the fourth round

phoenicks
01-15-2009, 09:40 PM
Umm Marry is ranked 4th. What can Federer do about that? If Murray was to be on Federer's draw then Djokovic would have been on Nadal's. Then you same people would have complained Federer having an easy draw because the defending champ is not in his draw. C'mon total nonsense!

Nonsense, who's spitting nonsense now??? Every1 knows Murray is the real deal at the moment, while the Defending champ is still adjusting to his new Head racquet.

R_Federer
01-15-2009, 09:41 PM
Nonsense, who's spitting nonsense now??? Every1 knows Murray is a real deal now, while the Defending champ is still adjusting to his new Head racquet.

So you're saying Murray should be 3 and Djokovic 4? And if that was the case...would you still say Federer has an easy draw?

R_Federer
01-15-2009, 09:43 PM
By the way, Murray is the most overrated player on the tour. He has taken that tag from Roddick. Seems like US and UK media work the same. Murray is just another Henman, I'm pretty confident he won't ever win a Slam even.

phoenicks
01-15-2009, 09:46 PM
By the way, Murray is the most overrated player on the tour. He has taken that tag from Roddick. Seems like US and UK media work the same. Murray is just another Henman, I'm pretty confident he won't ever win a Slam even.

Let's see what you're gonna say when Murray gun federer down and get a slam. I've dug a hole for you to hide in here though.:)

R_Federer
01-15-2009, 09:47 PM
Let's see what you're gonna say when Murray gun federer down and get a slam. I've dug a hole for you to hide in here though.:)

LoL we'll see...I like saying bold stuff to spice life up a bit :P. Can't wait for the action to start!

iriraz
01-15-2009, 09:53 PM
If someone talks about a rigged draw just look at this:
Qualifier
v
Brydan Klein AUS 248

Qualifier
v
Carsten Ball AUS 203

Qualifier
v
Colin Ebelthite AUS 253

seffina
01-15-2009, 09:54 PM
Federer has a pretty tricky start playing Seppi,Moya,Safin.It could have been a lot easier but on the other hand it`s hard to expect a lot from these guys.
At least it`s a good draw to get warmed up with.
From the Aussies perspective it was obvious it would be a tough draw for Hewitt.The good news for him is that he is not playing against the top 4 but on the other hand Gonzalez is a tough match.Not beeing seeded really sux,because u can play against a qualifier but also against number 1.
Murray has a tricky draw as well:Pavel in first round is not necessary a walkover,then Granollers,Nishikori/Melzer and then Stepanek/Verdasco.
Nadal`s draw in first 2 rounds is pretty straightforward and in third round he could have a tricky one with Haas.Naah, Nadal's never had trouble with Haas. Nadal doesn't have anyone to worry about until the quarters either.

P_Agony
01-15-2009, 10:06 PM
I'll admit it, I think Nadal has a tougher draw, but Federer's is not easy. Nalbandian and Djokovic may give him trouble. And if Safin is on, he could be deadly.

iriraz
01-15-2009, 10:10 PM
Federer has the most interesting draw playing good players from the start while Nadal has a few easy matches early on and then it starts getting tougher.

orangettecoleman
01-15-2009, 10:28 PM
poor santoro. to get to the fourth round he has to go through ferrero, kohlscheiber, and roddick. was hoping the old man could make a good run one more time. ah well.

380pistol
01-15-2009, 10:57 PM
I'll be the voice of reason. Nadal shouldn't have any real problems 'til the 4th rd, where he'll meet Gasquet or Gonzalez/Hewitt but with Lleyton's hip, and Gonzalez being Gonzalez, Nadal should be in the SF, as the only one left is Simon. Watchout for possible 3rd rd match between Nadal/Haas.

Would like to Karlovic vs Ancic in 2nd rd.

TOP QUARTER SF Nadal

Murray should cruise into the 4th rd without problems, Verdasco may give some resistance but if And'ys for real we should see him in the QF. There he should meet Tsonga. The highest ranke player to stop a Tsonga.Murray showdown is #9 Blake, but with his slam track record I don't see him spoiling the party.

2ND QUARTER SF Winner of Murray/Tsonga QF

Top half (of this quarter) looks interesting with Roddick, Ferrero and Nalbandian. Would like to a see a Roddick/Ferrero 3rd rd match. The winner of this could see Nalbandian in the 4th.... if Da-veed decides to show up. Djokovic should also get to the QF without incident, which he will need as his stamina is something I question and will need all the enrgy he has for another SF showdown with you know whom. Would like to see Djokovic/Dent in 3rd rd.

3RD QUARTER SF Djokovic

Federer should breeze into the 4th rd where he will likely see countryman Wawrinka. But a meeting with Safin in the 3rd rd could be interesting. I'll take Roger in 4 sets, cuzz I know one thing... Roger will show up. With Safin I'm not always sure. Del Potro/Cilic is what I want (and expect) to see in the 4th rd, and the winner will like see Federer in the QF.

BOTTOM QUARTER SF Federer


I had Djokovic and Federer co favourites going in. So would love to see a rematch in the SF between them.

greenfan
01-16-2009, 12:48 AM
There is not such a thing as an easy draw. Everyone is judged by his results! at the end of the tournament we'll finally see who had the easiest draw......;)

lonestar
01-16-2009, 01:02 AM
A quick reminder:
A tough draw is the draw Rafael Nadal gets. An easy draw is the draw Roger Federer gets.

PCXL-Fan
01-16-2009, 01:09 AM
Federer really have a damn easy draw, guess he's always favoured by the organizer, look at who nadal have to face in his own half, Murray, Tsonga, Simon, and all the most promising youngsters, Kei nishikori, Ernest gulbis.

Hope that Marat Safin can cause an major upset here like how he upset Djoker in last year Wimbledon. Go, Safin !!!

Safin, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Djokovic are easy? HaHa. I can sese the Nadal fans knowing Federer will win this tournament, hence making up BS like "easy draw for him".

Indeed. http://www.char.com/asdf.jpg

shintan17
01-16-2009, 01:10 AM
Man....this is really tough for two of my favorite players. I can't believe Hewitt and Gonzo playing each other in the first round. I don't know who to root for. I love both of them. Hopefully, goes to the distance and one wins by 101-99 in the fifth.

iriraz
01-16-2009, 01:15 AM
Nadal has an interesting draw but in the first week he doesn`t have that many difficult matches.I doubt he would have wanted Federer`s first three potential matches against:Seppi,Moya and Safin.I`m not saying Nadal would loose to any of those three but playing long matches early on is not the best way to prepare for a difficult second week.
Federer`s advantage is that he played Seppi and Moya this year and has a feel how this guys are playing but with Safin u never know what to expect.After that the draw gets better for him.

iriraz
01-16-2009, 01:21 AM
Man....this is really tough for two of my favorite players. I can't believe Hewitt and Gonzo playing each other in the first round. I don't know who to root for. I love both of them. Hopefully, goes to the distance and one wins by 101-99 in the fifth.

Wishful thinking.I doubt Hewitt would last a long 5 setter.Hewitt`s best chance is to play as fast as possible and win it in 3 or 4 sets.But obviously Gonzo is the favourite of the match and wouldn`t surprise me if he straight sets Hewitt.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 01:26 AM
By the way, Murray is the most overrated player on the tour. He has taken that tag from Roddick. Seems like US and UK media work the same. Murray is just another Henman, I'm pretty confident he won't ever win a Slam even.

Even more reason for your man to hang his head after being beaten by Murray four times in a row.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45376000/jpg/_45376015_big_four_form_v1.jpg


I'd go as far to say that Federer is probably the most overrated player of all time.

GOD_BLESS_RAFA
01-16-2009, 01:27 AM
a Murray - Tsonga match is a great expectation :)

madmanfool
01-16-2009, 01:29 AM
Even more reason for your man to hang his head after being beaten by Murray four times in a row.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45376000/jpg/_45376015_big_four_form_v1.jpg


I'd go as far to say that Federer is probably the most overrated player of all time.

Things like this are so useless. After Wimbledon there is only one grand slam left and guess who won it? Murray can have his percentage.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 01:34 AM
After Wimbledon there is only one grand slam left and guess who won it?

Guess who was in the final with him, had just beaten Nadal in a 2 day slog and didn't have any rest day, unlike Federer.

He's been the best player on tour since Wimbledon. He's beaten Nadal twice, Federer four times and Djokovic twice. What is the problem with giving the guy a little credit here.

P_Agony
01-16-2009, 01:41 AM
A quick reminder:
A tough draw is the draw Rafael Nadal gets. An easy draw is the draw Roger Federer gets.

Yeah we saw that in the US Open. Fail.

GOD_BLESS_RAFA
01-16-2009, 01:46 AM
Ok Murray has proven on hard courts he is a great threat ...not on grass and clay ...

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 01:50 AM
Ok Murray has proven on hard courts he is a great threat ...not on grass and clay ...

That's very true. There are so few grass tournaments compared to hard court that it is more important to be good on hard. I do think he can win on grass, though. His game will have to be adapted to it, but he needs to win where he is strongest before worrying about that.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 02:24 AM
Fed seems to have an easy draw. Murray is in Nadal's half, as well as Tsonga. Federer might have to face Nalbandian, Del Potro and Djoko.

You are on crack.

Federer really have a damn easy draw, guess he's always favoured by the organizer, look at who nadal have to face in his own half, Murray, Tsonga, Simon, and all the most promising youngsters, Kei nishikori, Ernest gulbis.

Hope that Marat Safin can cause an major upset here like how he upset Djoker in last year Wimbledon. Go, Safin !!!

Yeah, I guess he's been favored by the organizer about 13 times until now. Man...these organizers are evil dudes, they've helped such a useless player win so many slams...it's crazy, NO??
You're on crack.

By the way, Murray is the most overrated player on the tour. He has taken that tag from Roddick. Seems like US and UK media work the same. Murray is just another Henman, I'm pretty confident he won't ever win a Slam even.

You were going pretty well there for a while, but now you proved like the 2 quoted above to be ...on crack.

Let's see what you're gonna say when Murray gun federer down and get a slam. I've dug a hole for you to hide in here though.:)

This is very probable. I wouldn't bet on it for this AO though, but it may happen by US Open time, and if not ... certainly next year. Too bad you are oh so biased as seen in your first post.

I'll be the voice of reason. Nadal shouldn't have any real problems 'til the 4th rd, where he'll meet Gasquet or Gonzalez/Hewitt but with Lleyton's hip, and Gonzalez being Gonzalez, Nadal should be in the SF, as the only one left is Simon. Watchout for possible 3rd rd match between Nadal/Haas.

Would like to Karlovic vs Ancic in 2nd rd.

TOP QUARTER SF Nadal

Murray should cruise into the 4th rd without problems, Verdasco may give some resistance but if And'ys for real we should see him in the QF. There he should meet Tsonga. The highest ranke player to stop a Tsonga.Murray showdown is #9 Blake, but with his slam track record I don't see him spoiling the party.

2ND QUARTER SF Winner of Murray/Tsonga QF

Top half (of this quarter) looks interesting with Roddick, Ferrero and Nalbandian. Would like to a see a Roddick/Ferrero 3rd rd match. The winner of this could see Nalbandian in the 4th.... if Da-veed decides to show up. Djokovic should also get to the QF without incident, which he will need as his stamina is something I question and will need all the enrgy he has for another SF showdown with you know whom. Would like to see Djokovic/Dent in 3rd rd.

3RD QUARTER SF Djokovic

Federer should breeze into the 4th rd where he will likely see countryman Wawrinka. But a meeting with Safin in the 3rd rd could be interesting. I'll take Roger in 4 sets, cuzz I know one thing... Roger will show up. With Safin I'm not always sure. Del Potro/Cilic is what I want (and expect) to see in the 4th rd, and the winner will like see Federer in the QF.

BOTTOM QUARTER SF Federer


I had Djokovic and Federer co favourites going in. So would love to see a rematch in the SF between them.

I actually think Federer's draw is very tough, tougher than Nadal's (at least in the earlier rounds). The only "good thing" in Fedster's draw is that Murray is on the other side.
Your post is a good one, but I have a few comments.
I think Murray is a lock for the semis. Tsonga and Stepanek are "dangerous floaters" but I don't see them beating Murray in current form. He is on a mission and he's my pick for the semi.

I think Nadal is actually less probable to get to the semi's than Murray.
I see 3 dangerous Frenchies in his quarter, Monfils, Simon and Gasquet. Haas is not a factor IMO, in fact Eduardo S. might kick his arse in the first round.
If Hewitt is healthy and on top of his game, he might also be a "problem causer".
I'll take Monfils or Simon from this quarter to upset Nadal.

Djoko's/Roddick's quarter will be the most exciting and in this quarter the possibilities for surprises are endless IMO.
Starting with Rod...Kohlschreiber (http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/players/overview/atpk435.html) might have actually been dangerous in the 3rd round but he has an injured shoulder as far as I know. As it stands JC Ferrero is probably a safer bet. I still think ARod is a lock for the 4th round where he will probably meet Nalbandian (there's nobody that can beat him in his draw until the 4th round if he plays even remotely close to his potential). I think this 4th round will be an EXTREMELY exciting one to watch...as I liked the way Roddick served/moved in Doha.

Djoko should be a safe bet for the quarters where he will meet Nalbandian or Roddick (unless Chardy has an inspired day in the second round, and Djoko loses his balls somewhere along the line).
Bolelli, Soderling, PH Mathieu/Nieminen are dangerous floaters who can cause some issues for the others...and I'm sorry to say but Dent will get his arse kicked in the 2nd round at the latest.
I'd say either Nalby or Roddick get to the semis from here.

Last (Federer's quarter)...hmmm interesting one also. Interesting possible 3rd rounds Del Potro-Lopez with the winner to play Cilic/Tipsarevic maybe?? (not sure in what shape Ferrer is).
Federer - Wawrinka seems also a lock unless Safin and/or Berdych have some of those "no errors" days...in which case they can blow pretty much anybody off the court.
I'll take Federer from this quarter though ...

A quick reminder:
A tough draw is the draw Rafael Nadal gets. An easy draw is the draw Roger Federer gets.

Yeh, I think that Nadal's fans in general and on this forum are the younger demographic ... and it shows. That still doesn't excuse some of the fanatic, idiotic Fester fans who don't see anybody else as an exciting player/prospect (Murray/Djoko for example).
Sad really ...

Lotto
01-16-2009, 02:45 AM
I'd love to see a Federer-Murray final and for Federer to destroy him like he did at the US Open. Not because Federer's my favourite player but because I dislike Murray strongly. I cannot stand his attitude, it's horrible. The look on his face would be priceless :)

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 02:58 AM
(answer to od1n)You're the one on crack if you think that (on paper) the top part of the draw is not stronger than the bottom part. The bottom part has Roddick, Nalbandian, Djoko, Del Potro, Cilic and Safin, add Soderling if you want (although personally I don't see anything "floatingly" dangerous about him). That's 6 or 7 players. Now let's see what's happening in the top part of the draw. We have Gasquet, Hewitt, Gonzalez, Monfils, Youzhny, Karlovic, Simon, Gulbis, Andreev, Tsonga, Blake and Murray, yes you're right clownish draw at best, easy peasy, Federer gets to do ALL the work. Who's idiotic now?

edberg505
01-16-2009, 03:01 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.

navratilovafan
01-16-2009, 03:03 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.

and with delusional loud mouthed Nadal fanatics like veroniquem around it probably never will.

Gorecki
01-16-2009, 03:07 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.

NADAL, Rafael ESP [1]
SERRA, Florent FRA
KARANUSIC, Roko CRO
SCHWANK, Eduardo ARG
JUNQUEIRA, Diego ARG
SPADEA, Vincent USA
ISTOMIN, Denis UZB (W)
KOUBEK, Stefan AUT
GOLUBEV, Andrey KAZ
FOGNINI, Fabio ITA
MASSU, Nicolas CHI
GIMENO-TRAVER, Daniel ESP
GUCCIONE, Chris AUS
DEVILDER, Nicolas FRA
ANDUJAR, Pablo ESP

wouldnt you be afraid if you had Nadal's knees and had to face such fierce contenders? :twisted:

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 03:15 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.
I'm still waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream the draw is tougher for Fed. Haven't you read Od1n's post "I actually think Federer's draw is very tough, tougher than Nadal", yeah sure, bring the fools in right?
The bottom line is the top part of the draw is more competitive (on paper of course). That's valid for all players there, not just Nadal.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 03:16 AM
and with delusional loud mouthed Nadal fanatics like veroniquem around it probably never will.
I suppose Fed fans are not loud mouthed? Lol.

edberg505
01-16-2009, 03:26 AM
I'm still waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream the draw is tougher for Fed. Haven't you read Od1n's post "I actually think Federer's draw is very tough, tougher than Nadal", yeah sure, bring the fools in right?
The bottom line is the top part of the draw is more competitive (on paper of course). That's valid for all players there, not just Nadal.

LOL, I'm sure the instances of people saying Nadal's draw is tough vastly outnumber the times I've seen Federer's draw is tough. Besides, Nadal is the #1 player in the world isn't he? So he should have no problem navigating through any draw, right?

West Coast Ace
01-16-2009, 03:29 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.And I doubt there's any reason to be optimistic that it will happen any time soon. They believe the draws are rigged - how can you reason with that?

0d1n
01-16-2009, 03:37 AM
(answer to od1n)You're the one on crack if you think that (on paper) the top part of the draw is not stronger than the bottom part. The bottom part has Roddick, Nalbandian, Djoko, Del Potro, Cilic and Safin, add Soderling if you want (although personally I don't see anything "floatingly" dangerous about him). That's 6 or 7 players. Now let's see what's happening in the top part of the draw. We have Gasquet, Hewitt, Gonzalez, Monfils, Youzhny, Karlovic, Simon, Gulbis, Andreev, Tsonga, Blake and Murray, yes you're right clownish draw at best, easy peasy, Federer gets to do ALL the work. Who's idiotic now?

I'm talking about each player's quarters. Who except Monfils who recently beat Nadal would you say constitutes a SERIOUS danger for him? I added Simon for the fun of it, but I don't think he's truly capable of beating Nadal in a grand slam, not at this point (I HOPE him or Gasquet surprise me).
The only reason for you to be ****ed is the fact that you KNOW in case your boy gets to the semis he will get his *** handed to him by Murray (which might have happened to Fedster if HE was in Murray's half).
You can get over it now...if Nadal truly deserves winning the AO, he will find a way to win it. Just like if Federer truly deserves to win the FO, he better find a way to win it.
Let's take your examples and discuss them a bit. Adding Hewitt, Gonzalez, Youzhny, Karlovic, Gulbis, Andreev, and Blake as "oh so tough" players for Nadal just goes to show how stupidly biased you are.
Hewitt hasn't played serious matches for almost a year, Gonzalez couldn't be in sloppier form, Youzhny hasn't played good tennis for ages and Nadal has his number lately anyway, Karlovic was beaten by Nadal on faster surfaces (grass) and in fact he probably won't even get to ever meet Nadal because either Ancic or Simon will take care of him.
Gulbis is NOT any more dangerous than Berdych and/or Safin...in fact he is LESS dangerous because he's the same type of player but with less experience. Just because he's (at this stage in his career) overhyped by kids on this board because he hits with huge power doesn't mean he's in any shape or form able to beat a top 4-5 player in a major tournament. He does have the "POTENTIAL" to become a major threat, but he is far from being one at the moment.
Andreev and Blake are has beens and play poorly at the moment.
I'll give you the rest... but then again the rest are not any more dangerous than Roddick, Nalbandian, Djoko, Del Potro, Cilic and Safin...except MURRAY who is the only reason you're whinning.
You were hoping Murray would be in Federer's half, beat him in the semi's, and fall on his arse and break his leg so that Nadal will have a walk over final...otherwise there's no way in hell he can beat that guy on hardcourts.
Hope I didn't just destroy your wet dreams now...if I did...sorry...but there's just NO WAY IN HELL Nadal will win this AO. I think Federer has a better chance, but still he's 2nd favorite in my book.
My previous post wa a "balanced" one and provided some analysis. You on the other hand just throw out some names and let others know you have a man-crush on Nadal. We all know that already, now go fondle some sleeveless t-shirts and leave me alone.
Cheers.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 03:42 AM
I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal. I don't think that's ever happend as long as I've been on these boards.

You are right, but watch your back, a so called Nadal fan (because I don't consider obsessive morons true fans) will try to "get you".

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 03:50 AM
I'm talking about each player's quarters. Who except Monfils who recently beat Nadal would you say constitutes a SERIOUS danger for him? I added Simon for the fun of it, but I don't think he's truly capable of beating Nadal in a grand slam, not at this point (I HOPE him or Gasquet surprise me).
The only reason for you to be ****ed is the fact that you KNOW in case your boy gets to the semis he will get his *** handed to him by Murray (which might have happened to Fedster if HE was in Murray's half).
You can get over it now...if Nadal truly deserves winning the AO, he will find a way to win it. Just like if Federer truly deserves to win the FO, he better find a way to win it.
Let's take your examples and discuss them a bit. Adding Hewitt, Gonzalez, Youzhny, Karlovic, Gulbis, Andreev, and Blake as "oh so tough" players for Nadal just goes to show how stupidly biased you are.
Hewitt hasn't played serious matches for almost a year, Gonzalez couldn't be in sloppier form, Youzhny hasn't played good tennis for ages and Nadal has his number lately anyway, Karlovic was beaten by Nadal on faster surfaces (grass) and in fact he probably won't even get to ever meet Nadal because either Ancic or Simon will take care of him.
Gulbis is NOT any more dangerous than Berdych and/or Safin...in fact he is LESS dangerous because he's the same type of player but with less experience. Just because he's (at this stage in his career) overhyped by kids on this board because he hits with huge power doesn't mean he's in any shape or form able to beat a top 4-5 player in a major tournament. He does have the "POTENTIAL" to become a major threat, but he is far from being one at the moment.
Andreev and Blake are has beens and play poorly at the moment.
I'll give you the rest... but then again the rest are not any more dangerous than Roddick, Nalbandian, Djoko, Del Potro, Cilic and Safin...except MURRAY who is the only reason you're whinning.
You were hoping Murray would be in Federer's half, beat him in the semi's, and fall on his arse and break his leg so that Nadal will have a walk over final...otherwise there's no way in hell he can beat that guy on hardcourts.
Hope I didn't just destroy your wet dreams now...if I did...sorry...but there's just NO WAY IN HELL Nadal will win this AO. I think Federer has a better chance, but still he's 2nd favorite in my book.
My previous post wa a "balanced" one and provided some analysis. You on the other hand just throw out some names and let others know you have a man-crush on Nadal. We all know that already, now go fondle some sleeveless t-shirts and leave me alone.
Cheers.
Your post was not balanced and it was repeatedly insulting (idiotic, moron, etc) or patronizing (Younger demographic? Please!) You're also extravagantly biassed with remarks like "no way in hell Nadal will win this AO", where does that come from? I think his chances are a little bit higher than that no? I'd rather have a crush than be full of hatred like you are. Anyway the draw is only on paper, there are always surprises on court. Let's just see how the story unfolds.

zagor
01-16-2009, 03:52 AM
Federer really have a damn easy draw, guess he's always favoured by the organizer, look at who nadal have to face in his own half, Murray, Tsonga, Simon, and all the most promising youngsters, Kei nishikori, Ernest gulbis.

Hope that Marat Safin can cause an major upset here like how he upset Djoker in last year Wimbledon. Go, Safin !!!

Oh crap,yet another Nadal conspiracy theoriest..

A quick reminder:
A tough draw is the draw Rafael Nadal gets. An easy draw is the draw Roger Federer gets.

As spoken by wise Malakas :).I haven't seen her post here in quite a while though,maybe she'll comeback now when AO starts.

I'd go as far to say that Federer is probably the most overrated player of all time.

I'd go as far to say that this is one of the dumbest statements I've seen here(and that's saying a lot since competition is so fierce in this forum in that regard)

I'm waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream bad draw for Nadal.

Don't hold your breath.

West Coast Ace
01-16-2009, 03:54 AM
I'm still waiting for a slam draw to come out where people don't scream the draw is tougher for Fed. Haven't you read Od1n's post "I actually think Federer's draw is very tough, tougher than Nadal", yeah sure, bring the fools in right?
The bottom line is the top part of the draw is more competitive (on paper of course). That's valid for all players there, not just Nadal.Don't lump all Fed fans because you found 1 post - if there is a post complaining about a draw, you can almost bet it's from the Nadal camp. Fed was #1 for years - why would his fans complain? He beat EVERYBODY!

I'm talking about each player's quarters....We all know that already, now go fondle some sleeveless t-shirts and leave me alone.
Cheers.You did a great job, but other than the exercise, it was a waste of time. In Nadal fans' eyes, everyone Rafa has to play is a future major winner; everyone Fed has to play is a bum who barely knows what end of the racket to hold onto...

egn
01-16-2009, 04:00 AM
Federer really have a damn easy draw, guess he's always favoured by the organizer, look at who nadal have to face in his own half, Murray, Tsonga, Simon, and all the most promising youngsters, Kei nishikori, Ernest gulbis.

Hope that Marat Safin can cause an major upset here like how he upset Djoker in last year Wimbledon. Go, Safin !!!

oh yea nishikori is really going to stop Nada. The only tough people on his draw are Simon, Tsogna and Murray, note there is no way he can play all 3 first of all.
Fed's Draw
Seppei, Moya, Safin, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Djokovic (this is how I think it will line up)

vs.
Nadal's Draw
idk no names, maybe hass, He might get Gasquet or Gonzalez, Monfolis, simon or ancic, murray or tsogna. (a little shaky on Nadal but these are who I see prevailing)

No offense neither are omg easy and neither are hard. First two rounds are really easy. Third round Safin is probably more of a threat that Gasqut or Gonzalez, Wawrinka and Monfolis are similar, Del Potro and Simon are on same level the only thing is for some reason simon always beats Nadal and Fed. Djokovic and Murray and Tsogna are all level. They are all capable of beating the top 2 honestly I will admit Fed lucked out by getting Djokovic but since tsogna is good on murray and djoker but Fed's style favors him playing Tsogna it isp robably better for Nadal that Tsogna is on his side, because Fed could probably beat Tsogna.

Easiest draw of the top 4 is Djoker hands down though if he does not get to the semis that is a joke. How does he always seem to escape lately and get only Roddick in his half of the draw. Djoker gets to the semis with no problem.

In order of difficulty it probably goes
Nadal
Fed
Murray
Djoker

Murray only so low because I really don't think he has any threats but Tsogna.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 04:03 AM
Your post was not balanced and it was repeatedly insulting (idiotic, moron, etc) or patronizing (Younger demographic? Please!) You're also extravagantly biassed with remarks like "no way in hell Nadal will win this AO", where does that come from? I think his chances are a little bit higher than that no? I'd rather have a crush than be full of hatred like you are. Anyway the draw is only on paper, there are always surprises on court. Let's just see how the story unfolds.

Listen mate, if you would have actually READ my post instead of filtering it through your biased, lacking comprehension little brain you would have seen that I actually called some FEDERER fans idiotic, not Nadal fans.
See quote bellow. I only called "your mates" morons after your antagonizing previous post.
And no, his chances are not higher. Unless Murray breaks his legs or is shot by one of your friends Nadal has no chance to beat him, so even in THEORY Nadal only reaches the semis in my book. I'm not full of hatred, I actually like and respect Nadal. I just call it as I see it, and yes I like Federer's type/style of game a bit more. It's a personal preference. That doesn't mean I'm one of the "mental midget" Federer fans (or Nadal fans like yourself), and I don't see anything besides that player.
I'm actually glad Murray is stepping it up, and I really hope Djokovic doesn't lose his way, because I like to see GOOD COMPETITIVE TENNIS, not records being broken.
I look forward to 2009, because Monfils seems to play better tennis, because Gulbis might grow a brain...because because ..because.
You and others like you (not only so called Nadal fans, but also so called Federer fans) only litter this forum. I wish you would just ... dissapear.

Yeh, I think that Nadal's fans in general and on this forum are the younger demographic ... and it shows. That still doesn't excuse some of the fanatic, idiotic Fester fans who don't see anybody else as an exciting player/prospect (Murray/Djoko for example).
Sad really ...

dr325i
01-16-2009, 04:06 AM
Djoker, del potro and Warwrinka are no match for Murray, Tsonga and Simon, I am sure Fed is having a party to celebrate the easy fraw for him in AO, esp avoiding the RED HOT Murray in his own half.

you're such an expert...

luckyboy1300
01-16-2009, 04:06 AM
yeah nadal fans are really crazy, at least not all. i can't still believe that after all the bragging "nah nothing matters as long as he's number 1" they can still whine and whine and whine like faithless little twits in their champion.

zagor
01-16-2009, 04:10 AM
you're such an expert...

Lol,this forum is full of them.Especially the draw conspiracy theorists.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 04:12 AM
I'd go as far to say that this is one of the dumbest statements I've seen here(and that's saying a lot since competition is so fierce in this forum in that regard)


Good for you. How about you argue your point instead of flippant remarks.

Overrated doesn't mean that he's not a great player (a part of my post you chose to omit), it just means that people overrate him. He is constantly called the greatest of all time without any analysis of his achievements. It's blind and it's ignorant.

So, argue your point and we can discuss the merits. That is conducive to an adult conversation.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 04:14 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

egn
01-16-2009, 04:16 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

Well put =] Djokovic is definitly more of a threat here that Murray.

MarrratSafin
01-16-2009, 04:16 AM
Safin to beat Fed in 3rd round. GO MARAT! I hope Roddick goes far but Nalbandian is tough.

oranges
01-16-2009, 04:17 AM
(answer to od1n)You're the one on crack if you think that (on paper) the top part of the draw is not stronger than the bottom part. The bottom part has Roddick, Nalbandian, Djoko, Del Potro, Cilic and Safin, add Soderling if you want (although personally I don't see anything "floatingly" dangerous about him). That's 6 or 7 players. Now let's see what's happening in the top part of the draw. We have Gasquet, Hewitt, Gonzalez, Monfils, Youzhny, Karlovic, Simon, Gulbis, Andreev, Tsonga, Blake and Murray, yes you're right clownish draw at best, easy peasy, Federer gets to do ALL the work. Who's idiotic now?

ROTFL, please tell me that you're not seriously including Karlovic as a threat to anyone in a GS, that's really desperate. The man has never, I repeat NEVER, made it past round 3 anywhere and more often than not he goes down in R1 to the likes of Stadtler. Feel free to check who the giant who kicked him out of Wimbledon is.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 04:18 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

Nice to see some sanity and logic from a guy with your user name.
Maybe you should ask for veroniquem's number and talk some sense into him/her as well, it will help him/her in the long run. :oops:

caulcano
01-16-2009, 04:20 AM
So almost everyone is expecting the Top 4 to reach the SF.

To me, I wouldn't be surprised if any of the Top 4 won. That's how close it is.

zagor
01-16-2009, 04:22 AM
Good for you. How about you argue your point instead of flippant remarks.

Overrated doesn't mean that he's not a great player (a part of my post you chose to omit), it just means that people overrate him. He is constantly called the greatest of all time without any analysis of his achievements. It's blind and it's ignorant.

So, argue your point and we can discuss the merits. That is conducive to an adult conversation.

I would if I didn't feel that stating that a player who won 13 slams by the age of 27 is the most overrated player of all time is so ridiculous it doesn't need to be argued against.Anyone who is even remotely objective tennis fan would see that statement as being clueless.You didn't say Fed is overrated,you said he's the most overrated player of all times,that shows ignorance in tennis as a sport as far as I'm concerned.

Yes some Fed fans say Fed is GOAT as do Sampras fans say for Pete.That doesn't make either of them overrated even if they probably shouldn't be addressed as such considered Laver's achievements.

MarrratSafin
01-16-2009, 04:23 AM
Good draw for Nole, but he's not playing too well lately.. Fed can count himself lucky if he gets to the semis, his two biggest problems, Nadal and Murray are not in his half. If Roddick can beat Nalbandian.. he can get to the final.

zagor
01-16-2009, 04:25 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

Yeah,Murray is in better form at the moment but that varies from tournament to tournament and Djokovic is still a defending champion so he's not to be underestimated here.He lost only one set at AO last year,tooking out Fed in straights in semis.I'm sure he'll be very motivated to defend his title here.

So almost everyone is expecting the Top 4 to reach the SF.

To me, I wouldn't be surprised if any of the Top 4 won. That's how close it is.

Definitely,each of the big 4 has a good shot at the title here.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 04:34 AM
Don't lump all Fed fans because you found 1 post - if there is a post complaining about a draw, you can almost bet it's from the Nadal camp. Fed was #1 for years - why would his fans complain? He beat EVERYBODY!

You did a great job, but other than the exercise, it was a waste of time. In Nadal fans' eyes, everyone Rafa has to play is a future major winner; everyone Fed has to play is a bum who barely knows what end of the racket to hold onto...
Being abusive is not doing a great job IMO but to each their own.

shintan17
01-16-2009, 04:34 AM
Wishful thinking.I doubt Hewitt would last a long 5 setter.Hewitt`s best chance is to play as fast as possible and win it in 3 or 4 sets.But obviously Gonzo is the favourite of the match and wouldn`t surprise me if he straight sets Hewitt.

Are you joking? Have you checked Hewitt's record for 5 setters? Better than almost anyone on the tour I bet. However, given his current physical condition, I have no idea since I haven't been able to watch him play at all this year. Yes, Gonzo is the favorite in this match and if I had to bet money, I would say Gonzo in 4.

edberg505
01-16-2009, 04:37 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

What the ? Ok, I know what's going on here now. You and Veroniquem must have exchanged passwords. Trying to pull the wool over our eyes eh? On, second thougt that can't be right either, Veroniquem is pretty darn biased too. Maybe you hit your head.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 04:39 AM
ROTFL, please tell me that you're not seriously including Karlovic as a threat to anyone in a GS, that's really desperate. The man has never, I repeat NEVER, made it past round 3 anywhere and more often than not he goes down in R1 to the likes of Stadtler. Feel free to check who the giant who kicked him out of Wimbledon is.
If he beat Federer on hard court, he cannot be that bad, can he? I quoted him because he has a big serve. I agree that I don't expect him to win or anything like that but he's not an opponent you would be happy to face on a hard surface.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 04:47 AM
Well put =] Djokovic is definitly more of a threat here that Murray.
I guess you haven't seen Djoko play yesterday :-?. Whatever the problem is I'm not sure, but his tennis is not in place right now. On the other hand Murray is playing like there's no tomorrow. Things can always change later but the way they stand right now I would say there's a big difference between the 2.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 04:50 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.
Depends which Djoko you're talking about, unless he finds some miracle cure in the next three days for tidying up his game, he's not going anywhere at the AO with what he showed vs Nieminen in Sydney.

edberg505
01-16-2009, 04:51 AM
If he beat Federer on hard court, he cannot be that bad, can he? I quoted him because he has a big serve. I agree that I don't expect him to win or anything like that but he's not an opponent you would be happy to face on a hard surface.

Ok, did you say before that Federer wasn't in his prime anymore, thus his reason for Karlovic beating him. So, that's really a big shocker. Nadal is in his prime so he should waste Karlovic. I don't really see what the problem is here some of these same Nadal fans boast about how Nadal owns a winning record over everyone in the top ten and yet they see his side of the draw and yell tough draw. You can't have it both ways.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 04:52 AM
I would if I didn't feel that stating that a player who won 13 slams by the age of 27 is the most overrated player of all time is so ridiculous it doesn't need to be argued against.

He won 11 of those 13 slams in a 3/4 year period. The reason that he won them is because he had a free reign to do so. I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that being called the greatest of all time, when you've had very little challenge on his way to the vast majority of his slams, leads to you being extremely overrated.

you didn't say Fed is overrated,you said he's the most overrated player of all times

I said that he is 'probably' the most overrated of all time. Which I consider to be true. Stating the amount of times he has won a slam has no relevance to how overrated he is.

that shows ignorance in tennis as a sport as far as I'm concerned.


Having been a professional tennis player and now a professional tennis coach for 8 years, I'd say that you're overstating my ignorance surrounding the game. Now, you can continue to insult me or you can talk like an adult. It's up to you, but it's starting to **** me off.

If you want to make a case that somebody else is more overrated than him, then fine. I've made my case for Federer and I can't think of anybody that has been so consistently overrated.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 04:54 AM
Djokovic is getting severely underrated here. I know Murray is the hot player at the moment but Djokovic took Fed out last year and won it. He dominated in Shanghai. There is no easy side of the draw anymore unless one of them goes out.

I agree, but it depends which Djokovic turns up to the tournament. He was beaten in straights by Niemenen yesterday.

oranges
01-16-2009, 04:58 AM
If he beat Federer on hard court, he cannot be that bad, can he? I quoted him because he has a big serve. I agree that I don't expect him to win or anything like that but he's not an opponent you would be happy to face on a hard surface.

There's a reason why Karlovic is **** at slams and it's simple, they play best of five matches. Look up who are the guys who've been kicking him the first rounds of Wimby, AO and USO.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 05:03 AM
NADAL, Rafael ESP [1]
SERRA, Florent FRA
KARANUSIC, Roko CRO
SCHWANK, Eduardo ARG
JUNQUEIRA, Diego ARG
SPADEA, Vincent USA
ISTOMIN, Denis UZB (W)
KOUBEK, Stefan AUT
GOLUBEV, Andrey KAZ
FOGNINI, Fabio ITA
MASSU, Nicolas CHI
GIMENO-TRAVER, Daniel ESP
GUCCIONE, Chris AUS
DEVILDER, Nicolas FRA
ANDUJAR, Pablo ESP

wouldnt you be afraid if you had Nadal's knees and had to face such fierce contenders? :twisted:
I don't know what it is you think you're listing but this is not Nadal's quarter. You forgot to list Haas, Tursunov, Gasquet, Canas, Kiefer, Gonzalez, Hewitt, Monfils, Youzhny, Karlovic, Ancic and Gilles Simon, I guess it's absent-mindedness?

0d1n
01-16-2009, 05:04 AM
Being abusive is not doing a great job IMO but to each their own.

Rushing into biased responses without reading carefully what another poster meant or actually posted, and then avoiding to answer the following posts which contain clarifications (where proven wrong) is not doing a great job either.
Nice "ducking", I guess that's doing a "great job" of avoiding the responsibility of your own mistake.
Looking forward to reading some posts where you provide arguments that back up your positions instead of just talking without actually saying something (you should try politics...in politics this skill is a great asset to have).

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 05:05 AM
There's a reason why Karlovic is **** at slams and it's simple, they play best of five matches. Look up who are the guys who've been kicking him the first rounds of Wimby, AO and USO.
OK, I didn't know he had a block with 5 setters. I have seen him play pretty good 3 setters.

edberg505
01-16-2009, 05:06 AM
He won 11 of those 13 slams in a 3/4 year period. The reason that he won them is because he had a free reign to do so. I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that being called the greatest of all time, when you've had very little challenge on his way to the vast majority of his slams, leads to you being extremely overrated.



I said that he is 'probably' the most overrated of all time. Which I consider to be true. Stating the amount of times he has won a slam has no relevance to how overrated he is.



Having been a professional tennis player and now a professional tennis coach for 8 years, I'd say that you're overstating my ignorance surrounding the game. Now, you can continue to insult me or you can talk like an adult. It's up to you, but it's starting to **** me off.

If you want to make a case that somebody else is more overrated than him, then fine. I've made my case for Federer and I can't think of anybody that has been so consistently overrated.

http://i36.tinypic.com/2lke1zp.jpg

Oh, you were a pro player, what a coincidence, me too. And Federer had free reign? I guess he must have been playing crash test dummies in all of those finals. I saw your little graph you put up on the previous page. I'm sure we probably won't hear too much from you if Murray turns out to be a brick and not win a single slam this year. You sound awfully bitter, are you sure your name isn't Pete Sampras?

oranges
01-16-2009, 05:15 AM
OK, I didn't know he had a block with 5 setters. I have seen him play pretty good 3 setters.

It's not a block, it's his game. Breaking the opponent is not exactly his forte and scraping a win in 3,4 or 5 TBs is far more difficult than doing the same in 2-3 sets, not to mention that it's more difficult to maintain the same service quality over 5 sets, making him more vulnerable to breaks.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:23 AM
I'm sure we probably won't hear too much from you if Murray turns out to be a brick and not win a single slam this year.

I'm no Murray fan, I can just notice how much he has improved. What I find strange is that you've bought Murray, who you obviously assume I'm a fan of, into a conversation about Federer.

You sound awfully bitter, are you sure your name isn't Pete Sampras?

I've got nothing to be bitter about. I'm just saying that he won 11 of 13 when there was nobody putting up a significant challenge like there is now. Even now there isn't the depth of talent that Sampras had to deal with.

I've no doubt Federer will smash Sampras' record. I've no doubt he is a top player. I just don't think he's even close to being the greatest of all time and I think that he it is only really argued by people that have only ever seen Federer and not any of the other top players down the years.

random guy
01-16-2009, 05:26 AM
Dream final (for me) Nadal-Nalbandian in an epic five setter. Of course for all I know Nalby could enter one of his infamous lapses and go out in 2nd round but a man can dream right?

luckyboy1300
01-16-2009, 05:29 AM
I'm no Murray fan, I can just notice how much he has improved. What I find strange is that you've bought Murray, who you obviously assume I'm a fan of, into a conversation about Federer.



I've got nothing to be bitter about. I'm just saying that he won 11 of 13 when there was nobody putting up a significant challenge like there is now. Even now there isn't the depth of talent that Sampras had to deal with.

I've no doubt Federer will smash Sampras' record. I've no doubt he is a top player. I just don't think he's even close to being the greatest of all time and I think that he it is only really argued by people that have only ever seen Federer and not any of the other top players down the years.

http://americanpatrol.com/POPUPS/IMAGES/BS-Meter.gif

typical sampras fan ideology. it can be argued in both ways that federer was just too damn good he made his competition look easy. depth of talent who? krajicek? magnus norman? ramon delgado? i have heard "true" former professional players and analysts that said the depth of men's tennis is really great now.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:32 AM
typical sampras fan ideology.

I hate Sampras. Carry on, though.

i have heard "true" former professional players and analysts that said the depth of men's tennis is really great now.

When did they say that?

zagor
01-16-2009, 05:37 AM
He won 11 of those 13 slams in a 3/4 year period. The reason that he won them is because he had a free reign to do so. I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that being called the greatest of all time, when you've had very little challenge on his way to the vast majority of his slams, leads to you being extremely overrated.

Sorry,I have a really hard time believing that an ex-pro would say Fed had a "free reign",insulting his contemporaries and rivals in such a way as both ex and current pros know just how hard it is to earn even a single ATP point let alone reach top 100-50 and being able to make a living of it.They know how talented those guys that even play challengers are.A proffesional coach would realize how terrific are the players who completely dominate college tennis yet they still find it hard to make a dent on proffesional tour.


I said that he is 'probably' the most overrated of all time. Which I consider to be true. Stating the amount of times he has won a slam has no relevance to how overrated he is.

Another statement which I consider to be completely ignorant.Slams are the biggest and toughest to win tournaments in tennis,an ultimate prize for any proffesional tennis player in the world.An ex-pro would know just how much hardwork,dedication and talent is needed to win one single slam let alone 13.

So no,you're wrong,number of slams the player won has EVERYTHING to do with how overrated he or she is.Overrated players are mostly talented guys who were touted for greatness but never proved their ability in slams.

Having been a professional tennis player and now a professional tennis coach for 8 years.

No offense,but don't buy that,not for a second.

Now, you can continue to insult me or you can talk like an adult.

And where exactly did I insult you personally? I didn't call you specifically any names or anything like that.I said that I find a statement-"Fed is the most overrated player of all time" to be dumb,ignorant and clueless and I still stand by that opinion.I didn't say you specifically were any of those things,now did I?

If I say a xy player made a dumb shot in some situation that doesn't mean that I consider that certain player to be dumb overall,get it?

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:39 AM
I read the first line of that and gave up. If only you had started with a cool little graphic to show your displeasure.

zagor
01-16-2009, 05:40 AM
I'm no Murray fan, I can just notice how much he has improved. What I find strange is that you've bought Murray, who you obviously assume I'm a fan of, into a conversation about Federer.



I've got nothing to be bitter about. I'm just saying that he won 11 of 13 when there was nobody putting up a significant challenge like there is now. Even now there isn't the depth of talent that Sampras had to deal with.

I've no doubt Federer will smash Sampras' record. I've no doubt he is a top player. I just don't think he's even close to being the greatest of all time and I think that he it is only really argued by people that have only ever seen Federer and not any of the other top players down the years.

Yes by guys like Agassi,Wilander,Lendl,Kramer,Jim Courier,Ivanisevic,Henman etc. I'm sure they haven't seen any other top player besides Federer in their entire life.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 05:40 AM
I read the first line of that and gave up. If only you had started with a cool little graphic to show your displeasure.

Way to dodge the response. :roll: And a condescending statement to end it. Bravo.

What to those who have seen a lot of footage of the greats, and still think Federer warrants the praise he gets?

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:44 AM
Way to dodge the response. :roll: And a condescending statement to end it. Bravo.

Thanks. I appreciate it.


That's sarcasm, incase you missed it.

What to those who have seen a lot of footage of the greats, and still think Federer warrants the praise he gets?

I'd sooner debate with somebody that was there to witness more tennis than videos and the Federer 'era' (if you can call 4 years an era).

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 05:44 AM
Rushing into biased responses without reading carefully what another poster meant or actually posted, and then avoiding to answer the following posts which contain clarifications (where proven wrong) is not doing a great job either.
Nice "ducking", I guess that's doing a "great job" of avoiding the responsibility of your own mistake.
Looking forward to reading some posts where you provide arguments that back up your positions instead of just talking without actually saying something (you should try politics...in politics this skill is a great asset to have).
I read your comments again and I actually agree that Simon and Monfils would be tough for Rafa, nothing he can't overcome though, despite the Doha match I don't see Monfils causing the upset in best of 5. Gasquet is always dangerous in the first rounds. The things I disagree with: Hewitt being harmless (this is his home tournament, he's played amazing 5 setters in AO, he's a former #1 and a renowned fighter, not exactly a tool). I also disagree about Gonzalez, he's a good hard court player, former finalist at AO and finalist at Olympics this year, he has his good days on court. Finally I disagree about Fed's quarter being tougher. Del Potro and Cilic are good but Safin isn't healthy from what I understand, other than that, I would say his quarter is OK.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 05:46 AM
Way to dodge the response. :roll: And a condescending statement to end it. Bravo.

What to those who have seen a lot of footage of the greats, and still think Federer warrants the praise he gets?


It's Nadal_Freak, I guarantee it. If you IP checked him it would be so obvious. This Ari guy isn't a professional tennis player or coach. I can guarantee that. Winning a slam, is never easy. Even Kafelnikov, who had magic dream draws still had to WIN his slams. It's not like they were handed over to him on a sliver platter.

oranges
01-16-2009, 05:48 AM
Dear Ari, if you manage to get zagor to dismiss your claim as dumb without giving all the pros, cons and possible reasons why it also might have relevance, it's pretty much sure it's dumb. He manages to find a point or two even in Nadal_freak's posts :p

Gorecki
01-16-2009, 05:48 AM
Dream final (for me) Nadal-Nalbandian in an epic five setter. Of course for all I know Nalby could enter one of his infamous lapses and go out in 2nd round but a man can dream right?

im with you on the nalbandian part...

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:48 AM
It's Nadal_Freak, I guarantee it. If you IP checked him it would be so obvious.

I'm willing to make a 1000 bet that I'm not.

This Ari guy isn't a professional tennis player or coach. I can guarantee that.

You can't guarantee anything.

Winning a slam, is never easy.

Did I ever say it was?

It's not like they were handed over to him on a sliver platter.

A free reign doesn't mean he didn't play and win tournaments. I just means that there were no credible challengers.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 05:48 AM
What clarifications? The way you analyze Nadal's quarter is both biassed and non-sensical and you think I should treat it seriously? If what you want is a rebuttal, OK that's really easy. You treat Gonzalez as a complete tool although Gonzalez is a former AO finalist, beat Federer in the 2007 Master cup (RR) and was in the Olympics final this year. You dismiss Hewitt completely even though this is his home tournament, the guy is a former #1 and renowned fighter and played a mindboggling 5 setter last year at AO vs Baghdatis. Gasquet maybe a mental midget but he has a beautiful game on fast surfaces and has caused upsets in the past in the early rounds, almost beat Murray this year at W and beat Roddick last year at W. You seem to believe that Simon is an absolute nobody but he has played some phenomenal matches this year vs top players like Nadal and Fed (Fed is 0-2 vs Simon). You don't mention Monfils at all even though Monfils had a good run in Doha and reached a slam semi in 2008. Now let's see if you can actually calm down and listen to what I'm actually saying. I am not saying any of these players is gonna beat Nadal, what I'm saying is that those people are not people one would be happy to meet IN THE FIRST ROUNDS of a slam and neither would they qualify as a piece of cake draw like you ludicrously implied.


None of them are good enough to beat Nadal in a best of 5, except maybe Hewitt. There's no way Monfils can hit winners for 3 sets straight, and Gasquet is well known for his mental weakness. Simon isn't strong enough to keep up with Nadal for a 5 set match. Only Hewitt has the mental and physical abilities to match Nadal in a 5 set match.



However, it's not like these guys are that great. Federer's side of the draw has plenty of dangerous players. He has a potential meeting with Safin in the 3rd round, who is never a fun guy to face, especially in the early stages of a slam.

zagor
01-16-2009, 05:51 AM
It's not a block, it's his game. Breaking the opponent is not exactly his forte and scraping a win in 3,4 or 5 TBs is far more difficult than doing the same in 2-3 sets, not to mention that it's more difficult to maintain the same service quality over 5 sets, making him more vulnerable to breaks.

Yeah,it's just plain easier to serve player off court in a best of 3 match.The longer the match goes,the opponent gets used to Ivo's serve more and returns a higher number of balls in play.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 05:52 AM
Thanks. I appreciate it.


That's sarcasm, incase you missed it.



I'd sooner debate with somebody that was there to witness more tennis than videos and the Federer 'era' (if you can call 4 years an era).

There you go again. Of course, I forgot that you are only entitled to an opinion if you watched a Sampras match back in the mid 90's. If you watch the same match replayed 15 years later, your opinion is void. You do a great job of delaying your response to someone's argument by posting as if you are superior. Thanks for the prompt regarding the sarcasm. I'm from the "Federer era" which of course renders me thick as **** :roll:

I can't see Ivo making any headway in a GS draw, simply because once people start picking his serve, they'll start to break him, and it isn't as if he can break back.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:54 AM
I'm from the "Federer era" which of course renders me thick as **** :roll:

Agreed. Unless you were being sarcastic, you little tinker.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 05:55 AM
I'm willing to make a 1000 bet that I'm not.



You can't guarantee anything.



Did I ever say it was?



A free reign doesn't mean he didn't play and win tournaments. I just means that there were no credible challengers.



No credible challengers? So players like Henman, Agassi, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, Gaudio, etc. are not credible challengers? Last time I checked, I'm pretty sure Agassi, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, and Gaudio combined have more slams combined together than the new generation.



Yes, I can guarantee you aren't a professional tennis coach and you weren't a professional tennis player. The fact that you think Roger Federer is overrated in the way you speak of him is utterly stupid. Yes, winning 1, 2, hell I'll give you even 5 slams can be the result of weak draws and weak competition. To win 13 just means you are utterly dominant, and you make your field appear to be weak. Put Sampras in Federer's field, and I highly doubt he could do the same.



You have no evidence to prove that you have even credentials to be talking about tennis. All we have is the word of a random person on the internet. Who's word am I going to take? The word of literally hundreds of professional tennis players? Or some random bitter idiot on the internet?

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 05:57 AM
random bitter idiot

My best guess is that you're no older than 14. Either way, you're going on ignore.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 05:58 AM
No credible challengers? So players like Henman, Agassi, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, Gaudio, etc. are not credible challengers? Last time I checked, I'm pretty sure Agassi, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, and Gaudio combined have more slams combined together than the new generation.



Yes, I can guarantee you aren't a professional tennis coach and you weren't a professional tennis player. The fact that you think Roger Federer is overrated in the way you speak of him is utterly stupid. Yes, winning 1, 2, hell I'll give you even 5 slams can be the result of weak draws and weak competition. To win 13 just means you are utterly dominant, and you make your field appear to be weak. Put Sampras in Federer's field, and I highly doubt he could do the same.



You have no evidence to prove that you have even credentials to be talking about tennis. All we have is the word of a random person on the internet. Who's word am I going to take? The word of literally hundreds of professional tennis players? Or some random bitter idiot on the internet?

He hasn't responded to one of my posts with any reference to tennis.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 05:59 AM
My best guess is that you're no older than 14. Either way, you're going on ignore.


Yes, put me on ignore because you are flat out lying. No respected professional tennis coach or former tennis player would call Federer overrated, ever. Not even Sampras, who has more credentials than ANYONE on this forum would go that far. You are obviously just a troll who has no idea what he is talking about.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 05:59 AM
My best guess is that you're no older than 14. Either way, you're going on ignore.
Smart decision but it sucks when they talk behind your back.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:00 AM
He hasn't responded to one of my posts with any reference to tennis.



Don't you remember? He's a professional tennis coach! I'm sure he's apart of the MUTAOFBS. Also known as, the Made Up Tennis Association of BULLCRAP.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:01 AM
Smart decision but it sucks when they talk behind your back.



Nice, did you switch accounts there? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who supposedly "attacks" you.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:01 AM
Smart decision but it sucks when they talk behind your back.

Honestly, I couldn't care less what a couple of kids on a forum say.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:03 AM
He hasn't responded to one of my posts with any reference to tennis.

What exactly are you saying to argue against the point I've made that Federer is 'probably the most overrated player'? Name somebody else that is more overrated and we can talk about it.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 06:04 AM
Nice, did you switch accounts there? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who supposedly "attacks" you.
You are the most consistent one and it seemed to bring more attackers for me since you decided to go to war with me.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 06:04 AM
Honestly, I couldn't care less what a couple of kids on a forum say.

Then why join the forum? To state your opinion, and then have people consult you like an oracle? Nadal_Freak has some different opinions to most, but at least he is prepared to argue them. This is a place to discuss, not state.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:04 AM
What exactly are you saying to argue against the point I've made that Federer is 'probably the most overrated player'? Name somebody else that is more overrated and we can talk about it.


Try Marcelo Rios, who was somehow one of the most talented players in the world, yet couldn't get over the hump and got beat down by a past prime Petr Korda.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:05 AM
You are the most consistent one and it seemed to bring more attackers for me since you decided to go to war with me.

I'm guessing 'NamRanger' is a Federer sycophant?

luckyboy1300
01-16-2009, 06:05 AM
Nice, did you switch accounts there? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who supposedly "attacks" you.

i doubt it's NF. his posts are typical of a sampras fanboy who spews arguments and BS we grew tired of already. NF is far from a sampras fanboy.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:06 AM
Then why join the forum? To state your opinion, and then have people consult you like an oracle? Nadal_Freak has some different opinions to most, but at least he is prepared to argue them. This is a place to discuss, not state.

I've argued it. Clearly.

Now, it's your turn to come up with a player that is more overrated than Federer. Then we can discuss the merits of that.

random guy
01-16-2009, 06:06 AM
Sampras era vs Fed era and who's draw is tougher Fed's or Nadal's seems like the vortex were old good thread go to die. I can believe how this two most masturbatory topics keeps popping and popping. :confused:

cknobman
01-16-2009, 06:07 AM
Nadal could face Eduardo Schwank 2nd round.

He could get Schwanked!

Ok looking at the draw and each of the big 4's section my opinion on difficulty is as follows(hardest to easiest):

Nadal
Federer
Murray
Djokovic

Which combining each quarter into halfs I would say the top half (Nadal, Murray) is harder than the bottom half (Federer, Djokovic).

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:08 AM
You are the most consistent one and it seemed to bring more attackers for me since you decided to go to war with me.



War? Maybe if you argued with some logic for once, you wouldn't be getting flamed left and right, by everyone that isn't a hardcore Nadal fan. I do seem to remember 2 Nadal fans (2 very big ones too) flaming you out of their own will because you said Federer had the weakest BH for a world #1.



A. Try to be a little less biased, since you are obviously so blind to anything that isn't pro Nadal.

B. When arguing, actually respond to people's arguments rather than completely ignoring them, calling their argument false or not credible, or calling their sources not credible (point example : "Andy Roddick was bitter and has no idea what he is talking about!") There are people with much more credibility and credentials than you, and I'm pretty sure they know what they are talking about.

C. Try not to make dumb statements like "Television viewers have a better idea of the surface speed than professional players do, because they have a better view of the court."



If you do those three things, I promise, you'll probably get attacked less often.

Gorecki
01-16-2009, 06:09 AM
Nice, did you switch accounts there? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who supposedly "attacks" you.

Nam: dont mess with the guy. he's been under fire from everyone. and after all he is such a nice poster... so gentle, so logical, so gracious...

so he knows nothing about tennis, physics and geography... must we punish him for that? i say no!

thejoe
01-16-2009, 06:09 AM
I've argued it. Clearly.

Now, it's your turn to come up with a player that is more overrated than Federer. Then we can discuss the merits of that.

You haven't. I showed you that there are informed Federer fans who have seen enough of the greats but still believe he is the best, and you came up with some BS stating the you don't want to discuss that with people like me.

To get the debate going: Marcelo Rios.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:12 AM
Nam: dont mess with the guy. he's been under fire from everyone. and after all he is such a nice poster... so gentle, so logical, so gracious...

so he knows nothing about tennis, physics and geography... must we punish him for that? i say no!



You mean, he doesn't know anything about basic physics and geography, and doesn't even play tennis to begin with. Making sweeping statements about how "well educated" tennis fans have more knowledge than a professional player about a certain surface!



He's not bad, at least he argues like a child, and once you catch him between a rock and a hard place, he doesn't know what to do. This Ari Gold guy acts like a pompous *** and states flat out lies.

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:15 AM
To get the debate going: Marcelo Rios.


Massively overrated. However, he was never rated like Federer as the greatest player of all time.

For me, it's the level that people rate Federer at and they do it without assessing the merits of his achievements.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 06:16 AM
War? Maybe if you argued with some logic for once, you wouldn't be getting flamed left and right, by everyone that isn't a hardcore Nadal fan. I do seem to remember 2 Nadal fans (2 very big ones too) flaming you out of their own will because you said Federer had the weakest BH for a world #1.



A. Try to be a little less biased, since you are obviously so blind to anything that isn't pro Nadal.

B. When arguing, actually respond to people's arguments rather than completely ignoring them, calling their argument false or not credible, or calling their sources not credible (point example : "Andy Roddick was bitter and has no idea what he is talking about!") There are people with much more credibility and credentials than you, and I'm pretty sure they know what they are talking about.

C. Try not to make dumb statements like "Television viewers have a better idea of the surface speed than professional players do, because they have a better view of the court."



If you do those three things, I promise, you'll probably get attacked less often.

So you are a Roddick fanboy then. Roddick just comes off a loss at Wimbledon and then complains about the speed of the court. A surface that he could not break on for the whole match. Maybe it was his movement/groundstrokes that suffers the most on grass. Not the speed of the court. And Nadal always wants to face Federer because he knows how easy Fed's backhand is to break down. I haven't seen any of the other top players consistently get broken down on the backhand like Federer. Djokovic and Murray also found weaknesses in that shot. Federer's movement, forehand, serve, and righties problems with having to go through Fed's forehand most of the time is what got him hear imo. Not his backhand. Btw you misquoted me. I said something like it is just as simple to see the speed of the court on tv then it is playing on it. You see short ralleys and lots of aces, it is most likely fast and etc.

fps
01-16-2009, 06:16 AM
Safin-Federer third round on fast hard courts? Could be amazing :)

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:16 AM
I'm getting ****ed off with being called a liar. I was pro for a year, had a car smash and now I coach. Get over yourself.

Gorecki
01-16-2009, 06:17 AM
You mean, he doesn't know anything about basic physics and geography, and doesn't even play tennis to begin with. Making sweeping statements about how "well educated" tennis fans have more knowledge than a professional player about a certain surface!



He's not bad, at least he argues like a child, and once you catch him between a rock and a hard place, he doesn't know what to do. This Ari Gold guy acts like a pompous *** and states flat out lies.

;-)

10 char...

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:19 AM
Safin-Federer third round on fast hard courts? Could be amazing :)

I have to say, I got a little excited at the possibility of that. Safin can beat anyone. He can also lose to anyone, so we'll have to see how it goes on the day. Could be a great match.

seffina
01-16-2009, 06:21 AM
Looking at the draws again, I suppose one could say Rafa's is more competitive, but there is nobody in his quarter that he can't beat or hasn't beat recently. Except Murray, there is nobody to seriously worry about. And Murray would have been a worry either way, right? Semi or Final, you have to beat the best to be the best.

Hope it's a Rafa/Roger final.

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 06:22 AM
None of them are good enough to beat Nadal in a best of 5, except maybe Hewitt. There's no way Monfils can hit winners for 3 sets straight, and Gasquet is well known for his mental weakness. Simon isn't strong enough to keep up with Nadal for a 5 set match. Only Hewitt has the mental and physical abilities to match Nadal in a 5 set match.



However, it's not like these guys are that great. Federer's side of the draw has plenty of dangerous players. He has a potential meeting with Safin in the 3rd round, who is never a fun guy to face, especially in the early stages of a slam.
Yes I actually changed that post (too late I guess!) because I realized I was commenting on another poster's analyzis (not od1n) because I mixed up 2 posters. (Sorry about that od1n if you happen to read this post)
Anyway Federer has a few good players in his quarter (like Cilic and Del Potro). I heard that Safin is not healthy though. All in all Fed's main stroke of luck is to avoid Murray (until the final at least) as Djoko's game hasn't been very convincing lately. On the other hand I'm happy Rafa won't have to deal with Nalby.

luckyboy1300
01-16-2009, 06:24 AM
Massively overrated. However, he was never rated like Federer as the greatest player of all time.

For me, it's the level that people rate Federer at and they do it without assessing the merits of his achievements.

HAHAHAHA!!! did you really expect a slamless guy be called a GOAT? from mcenroe's words: "You cannot be serious!!"

0d1n
01-16-2009, 06:24 AM
I have to say, I got a little excited at the possibility of that. Safin can beat anyone. He can also lose to anyone, so we'll have to see how it goes on the day. Could be a great match.

Yup. 2 of the most overrated players ever going at it. Great entertainment... :twisted:

Ari Gold
01-16-2009, 06:26 AM
did you really expect a slamless guy be called a GOAT?

No. Nor did I suggest it. So what is your problem.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 06:30 AM
So you are a Roddick fanboy then. Roddick just comes off a loss at Wimbledon and then complains about the speed of the court. A surface that he could not break on for the whole match. Maybe it was his movement/groundstrokes that suffers the most on grass. Not the speed of the court. And Nadal always wants to face Federer because he knows how easy Fed's backhand is to break down. I haven't seen any of the other top players consistently get broken down on the backhand like Federer. Djokovic and Murray also found weaknesses in that shot. Federer's movement, forehand, serve, and righties problems with having to go through Fed's forehand most of the time is what got him hear imo. Not his backhand. Btw you misquoted me. I said something like it is just as simple to see the speed of the court on tv then it is playing on it. You see short ralleys and lots of aces, it is most likely fast and etc.



I believe Andy Roddick has a little more credibility than that. Roddick is not typically a sore loser. He has always given his opponent credit, and never said anything to take away their victory. Never. He is well known to be a friendly and well liked person on the tour, despite the fact that he sometimes gets angsty on the court.



It's not certainly only Andy Roddick who says those courts are slower. Many other players, former players, and commentators all believe that the courts are much slower, whether it was intentional or not (and I do believe it was intentional). The former Wimbledon CEO stated that there was a concentrated effort over the past 10 years or so (from his interview) to slow down the grass. For you to truly believe that the grass is still the same speed as it once was, is showing your own insecurities about Nadal's victories.



Also, I did not misquote you at all. You said fans have a better view of the speed of the court than professional tennis players. That's an absurd statement, especially when professional players are kind of standing on the court.


I didn't say the fans are smarter about anything. I was just stating that Tennis players are just as biased as the fans. Their say is not any better. I enjoy this conversation. Especially when you continually misinterprate my posts.


The bolded part here shows exactly why people don't take you seriously. To say that professional tennis players' perspectives don't have more weight than a fans' perspectives, is a little bit absurd. Just a little.



Everyone is biased. I bet Nadal will tell you the courts are fast. Even Fed thinks so. Go to some bitter old pro who doesn't like Nadal and you'll get they are slower than clay, hard, or whatever crazy stuff they say.


Yes, because all former pros hate Nadal. They hate him. HATE. I am pretty sure Patrick Rafter and Goran have plenty of reasons to hate Rafael Nadal, even though they hardly know him.


Nothing in real life can give you as good of a view as on tv. I don't know why you don't think watching it on tv is a good way to see how the surface plays. You can clearly see where the player is hitting the ball from and how many free points they are getting from their serve.


Post of the century.


Penn Balls bounce higher and are heavier than Wilson. Both things would help Nadal in the matchup with Murray. For example, Nadal beat Murray in Toronto with Penn Balls.


Saying that tennis balls are the reason Nadal lost to Andy Murray at the USO is quite hilarious. And you called Andy Roddick a sore loser?

drakulie
01-16-2009, 07:01 AM
You are the most consistent one and it seemed to bring more attackers for me since you decided to go to war with me.

Muahahahaha. "WAR"??????

Nam doesn't need to go to "war" with you. If you haven't noticed, he has been doing this to you eveytime you post:

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z312/AmyAlways/Owned.gif


You are lucky he doesn't get midevil on you.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 07:11 AM
So I say...


......................
I actually think Federer's draw is very tough, tougher than Nadal's (at least in the earlier rounds). The only "good thing" in Fedster's draw is that Murray is on the other side.
Your post is a good one, but I have a few comments.
I think Murray is a lock for the semis. Tsonga and Stepanek are "dangerous floaters" but I don't see them beating Murray in current form. He is on a mission and he's my pick for the semi.

I think Nadal is actually less probable to get to the semi's than Murray.
I see 3 dangerous Frenchies in his quarter, Monfils, Simon and Gasquet. Haas is not a factor IMO, in fact Eduardo S. might kick his arse in the first round.
If Hewitt is healthy and on top of his game, he might also be a "problem causer".
I'll take Monfils or Simon from this quarter to upset Nadal.

Djoko's/Roddick's quarter will be the most exciting and in this quarter the possibilities for surprises are endless IMO.
Starting with Rod...Kohlschreiber (http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/players/overview/atpk435.html) might have actually been dangerous in the 3rd round but he has an injured shoulder as far as I know. As it stands JC Ferrero is probably a safer bet. I still think ARod is a lock for the 4th round where he will probably meet Nalbandian (there's nobody that can beat him in his draw until the 4th round if he plays even remotely close to his potential). I think this 4th round will be an EXTREMELY exciting one to watch...as I liked the way Roddick served/moved in Doha.

Djoko should be a safe bet for the quarters where he will meet Nalbandian or Roddick (unless Chardy has an inspired day in the second round, and Djoko loses his balls somewhere along the line).
Bolelli, Soderling, PH Mathieu/Nieminen are dangerous floaters who can cause some issues for the others...and I'm sorry to say but Dent will get his arse kicked in the 2nd round at the latest.
I'd say either Nalby or Roddick get to the semis from here.

Last (Federer's quarter)...hmmm interesting one also. Interesting possible 3rd rounds Del Potro-Lopez with the winner to play Cilic/Tipsarevic maybe?? (not sure in what shape Ferrer is).
Federer - Wawrinka seems also a lock unless Safin and/or Berdych have some of those "no errors" days...in which case they can blow pretty much anybody off the court.
I'll take Federer from this quarter though ...
......


and then you say

What clarifications? The way you analyze Nadal's quarter is both biassed and non-sensical and you think I should treat it seriously? If what you want is a rebuttal, OK that's really easy. You treat Gonzalez as a complete tool although Gonzalez is a former AO finalist, beat Federer in the 2007 Master cup (RR) and was in the Olympics final this year. You dismiss Hewitt completely even though this is his home tournament, the guy is a former #1 and renowned fighter and played a mindboggling 5 setter last year at AO vs Baghdatis. Gasquet maybe a mental midget but he has a beautiful game on fast surfaces and has caused upsets in the past in the early rounds, almost beat Murray this year at W and beat Roddick last year at W. You seem to believe that Simon is an absolute nobody but he has played some phenomenal matches this year vs top players like Nadal and Fed (Fed is 0-2 vs Simon). You don't mention Monfils at all even though Monfils had a good run in Doha and reached a slam semi in 2008. Now let's see if you can actually calm down and listen to what I'm actually saying. I am not saying any of these players is gonna beat Nadal, what I'm saying is that those people are not people one would be happy to meet IN THE FIRST ROUNDS of a slam and neither would they qualify as a piece of cake draw like you ludicrously implied.

And you expect to be taken seriously...?
Mate, YOU DON'T EVEN READ what the other posters are saying ! ! ! You are simply talking out of your arse.
Maybe when you're older and/or wiser you will learn to actually LISTEN a bit instead of talking all the time.
I bet you do this in real life as well, continuously interrupting your partners in a discussion and telling them what YOU THINK they were going to say ... right ??

You say that "I treat Gonzalez as a complete tool although Gonzalez is a former AO finalist, beat Federer in the 2007 Master cup (RR) and was in the Olympics final this year.".

I'm not saying he's a tool I'm saying that we shouldn't judge based on 2007 form. If we would judge based on that form, Federer would be a huge favorite...but that's not the case ...is it ??
Also, I'm not doubting Hewitt's fighting spirit, I never did. I'm doubting his current ability/health/match toughness. This is NOT the same Hewitt who was owning Sampras a while ago, unfortunately he's lost quite a bit since then, and a 5 setter against Baghdatis is NOT an indication that he would do well in a 5 set match against Nadal under the scorching Australian sun.
He would LOSE and it wouldn't be pretty.
Anyway...if people would learn to at least TRY to control their biases, we would be so much better off...

================================================== =======================
Edit...
OK I see that you've gone back and edited pretty much everything that was in your initial post. Luckily NamRanger (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3011391&postcount=101 ) also quoted your initial one so that people won't think I somehow "made it up".

I see that you finally read and hopefully understood what I was ACTUALLY saying.
Anyway, this should be a lesson for the future. One should learn to actually understand what and whom they are debating before going ahead and arguing a point, especially when they do it so "abrasively" as you seem to do it.
I understand (somewhat) your "passion" for Nadal, but taking it to such extremes will only make you look bad in front of others.

fps
01-16-2009, 07:16 AM
I have to say, I got a little excited at the possibility of that. Safin can beat anyone. He can also lose to anyone, so we'll have to see how it goes on the day. Could be a great match.

shame it's happened this way i think he could have gone further with a kinder draw. but if he's going to compete with fed i think this is the surface he's going to do it on :)

fps
01-16-2009, 07:17 AM
as for nadal, i don't see him making the final.

drakulie
01-16-2009, 07:18 AM
So I say...



and then you say



And you expect to be taken seriously...?
Mate, YOU DON'T EVEN READ what the other posters are saying ! ! ! You are simply talking out of your arse.
Maybe when you're older and/or wiser you will learn to actually LISTEN a bit instead of talking all the time.
I bet you do this in real life as well, continuously interrupting your partners in a discussion and telling them what YOU THINK they were going to say ... right ??

You say that "I treat Gonzalez as a complete tool although Gonzalez is a former AO finalist, beat Federer in the 2007 Master cup (RR) and was in the Olympics final this year.".

I'm not saying he's a tool I'm saying that we shouldn't judge based on 2007 form. If we would judge based on that form, Federer would be a huge favorite...but that's not the case ...is it ??
Also, I'm not doubting Hewitt's fighting spirit, I never did. I'm doubting his current ability/health/match toughness. This is NOT the same Hewitt who was owning Sampras a while ago, unfortunately he's lost quite a bit since then, and a 5 setter against Baghdatis is NOT an indication that he would do well in a 5 set match against Nadal under the scorching Australian sun.
He would LOSE and it wouldn't be pretty.
Anyway...if people would learn to at least TRY to control their biases, we would be so much better off...

uhmmm, wow. Not much more to say after that. Veroniqeum, I suggest you quit while he is in a good mood.

Zaragoza
01-16-2009, 07:20 AM
A quick reminder:
A tough draw is the draw Rafael Nadal gets. An easy draw is the draw Roger Federer gets.

You have obviously missed 2006 and 2007. I read hundreds (not one or two) of Federer fans complaining about Nadal's draws all the time. Even in 2008 some of them were still complaining about Nadal's draws at Wimbledon in 2006 and 2007 (he reached the final because his draw was a joke, other players were injured, grass plays like clay...). They complained about his draw at the AO and the USO last year as well. The list of excuses when Nadal plays great outside clay is neverending on this forum. No one has been told to get easy draws more than Nadal. That quote is short-sighted and definitely lacks perspective. It would be more accurate if we switched names.

l_gonzalez
01-16-2009, 07:24 AM
Try Marcelo Rios, who was somehow one of the most talented players in the world, yet couldn't get over the hump and got beat down by a past prime Petr Korda.

Seriously mate, what IS your beef with Rios?!?! Did he steal your girlfriend or something?

Korda was on the nose candy in case you don't remember.

veritech
01-16-2009, 07:25 AM
You have obviously missed 2006 and 2007. I read hundreds (not one or two) of Federer fans complaining about Nadal's draws all the time. Even in 2008 some of them were still complaining about Nadal's draws at Wimbledon in 2006 and 2007 (he reached the final because his draw was a joke, other players were injured, grass plays like clay...). They complained about his draw at the AO and the USO last year as well. The list of excuses when Nadal plays great outside clay is neverending on this forum. No one has been told to get easy draws more than Nadal. That quote is short-sighted and definitely lacks perspective. It would be more accurate if we switched names.

^^it's all subjective. the truth is that no draw is easy.

seffina
01-16-2009, 07:25 AM
I think it's accurate depending on whose fan you are. I've only been here since last year's French Open and I've heard both sides claim the other's draw is easier in every single tournament.

Let's just play the matches already.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 07:26 AM
You have obviously missed 2006 and 2007. I read hundreds (not one or two) of Federer fans complaining about Nadal's draws all the time. Even in 2008 some of them were still complaining about Nadal's draws at Wimbledon in 2006 and 2007 (he reached the final because his draw was a joke, other players were injured, grass plays like clay...). They complained about his draw at the AO and the USO last year as well. The list of excuses when Nadal plays great outside clay is neverending on this forum. No one has been told to get easy draws more than Nadal. That quote is short-sighted and definitely lacks perspective. It would be more accurate if we switched names.


His 2006 Wimbledon draw was a joke. He played 2 qualifiers, a wild card, a well gassed out Agassi, Jarkko Niemenen in the quarters (seeded 22) and Marcos Baghdatis (seeded 18 ). He didn't play a single player in the top 15 to reach the final. If you seriously think that was a hard draw, you need to get off your high horse there buddy.


His 2008 US Open draw wasn't much better either. He played 2 qualifiers (Phau and DeHeart), 3 unseeded players (Troicki, Querrey, and Fish) before losing to Murray in the semis. That's not exactly a hard draw either, although both Querrey and Fish were tricky, it's not like they were exactly hard. Federer had the much harder draw on the other end.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 07:26 AM
Seriously mate, what IS your beef with Rios?!?! Did he steal your girlfriend or something?

Korda was on the nose candy in case you don't remember.



Because he's not, that, good. And he was an asshat to top it all off.

l_gonzalez
01-16-2009, 07:29 AM
Because he's not, that, good. And he was an asshat to top it all off.

Just say you don't like the guy, but you don't win 5 Masters Series if you're not, that, good.

svijk
01-16-2009, 07:29 AM
If someone talks about a rigged draw just look at this:
Qualifier
v
Brydan Klein AUS 248

Qualifier
v
Carsten Ball AUS 203

Qualifier
v
Colin Ebelthite AUS 253

Wow, thats great observation, gues Tennis Aus had to do something for the hewitt-gonzo 1st rd match up

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 07:29 AM
I believe Andy Roddick has a little more credibility than that. Roddick is not typically a sore loser. He has always given his opponent credit, and never said anything to take away their victory. Never. He is well known to be a friendly and well liked person on the tour, despite the fact that he sometimes gets angsty on the court.

It's not certainly only Andy Roddick who says those courts are slower. Many other players, former players, and commentators all believe that the courts are much slower, whether it was intentional or not (and I do believe it was intentional). The former Wimbledon CEO stated that there was a concentrated effort over the past 10 years or so (from his interview) to slow down the grass. For you to truly believe that the grass is still the same speed as it once was, is showing your own insecurities about Nadal's victories.
Well the stats back me up. Maybe the courts are slightly slower and higher bouncing but not that much difference. I think it has more to do with the racquets and maybe the balls are heavier which I think they could've done with all the tournaments on the ATP Tour to slow things down. Look at the ace counts though. Still very fast.


Also, I did not misquote you at all. You said fans have a better view of the speed of the court than professional tennis players. That's an absurd statement, especially when professional players are kind of standing on the court.

The bolded part here shows exactly why people don't take you seriously. To say that professional tennis players' perspectives don't have more weight than a fans' perspectives, is a little bit absurd. Just a little.

Yes, because all former pros hate Nadal. They hate him. HATE. I am pretty sure Patrick Rafter and Goran have plenty of reasons to hate Rafael Nadal, even though they hardly know him.

Where does it say I know more? It says I know the same as they do. I researched more then they have though on the stats. They can be equally biased. Also there is definitely a lot of people that hate grinders in general. Nadal is more then that but they think of him as that as he used to be more of just a grinder. Thus they want to think he can't win on grass courts or they think S&V would actually have success like they used to if they sped things up.

Saying that tennis balls are the reason Nadal lost to Andy Murray at the USO is quite hilarious. And you called Andy Roddick a sore loser?
If you watched that match in Toronto, you would notice how much higher the ball was bouncing there compared to the US Open. I was speculating that maybe it was the balls that allow for a higher bounce and are heavier. Yeah I shouldn't have stated it like I knew exactly what it was.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 07:31 AM
Just say you don't like the guy, but you don't win 5 Masters Series if you're not, that, good.


Master Series means nothing. Tim Henman isn't going to be considered a great player because he won a Master Series now is he?

drakulie
01-16-2009, 07:32 AM
Well the stats back me up.

Oh god! Not "your stats" again???

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z312/AmyAlways/Owned.gif

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 07:42 AM
Well the stats back me up. Maybe the courts are slightly slower and higher bouncing but not that much difference. I think it has more to do with the racquets and maybe the balls are heavier which I think they could've done with all the tournaments on the ATP Tour to slow things down. Look at the ace counts though. Still very fast.


Where does it say I know more? It says I know the same as they do. I researched more then they have though on the stats. They can be equally biased. Also there is definitely a lot of people that hate grinders in general. Nadal is more then that but they think of him as that as he used to be more of just a grinder. Thus they want to think he can't win on grass courts or they think S&V would actually have success like they used to if they sped things up.


If you watched that match in Toronto, you would notice how much higher the ball was bouncing there compared to the US Open. I was speculating that maybe it was the balls that allow for a higher bounce and are heavier. Yeah I shouldn't have stated it like I knew exactly what it was.



First bolded statement. The ITF has done everything in their power in order to slow the game down. This was specifically stated by many tournament directors. Also, the cutting out of carpet tournaments easily signifies that the ITF is trying to slow the game down, still.



Second bolded statement. If you truly think you have the same amount of knowledge as a professional tennis player such as Marat Safin, Andre Agassi, or anyone else for that matter that plays this sport for a living, you are utterly stupid. Period. This is the most absurd statement, I have EVER heard in my entire life. UTTERLY STUPID. I don't think anyone here who takes themselves seriously believes that they have as much knowledge about a tennis surface as a professional tennis player, who plays on that surface.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 07:48 AM
^To be fair, I think my clay court game rivals Andy Roddick's :p

Obviously I'm kidding. I agree. No one knows the trade better than those who have played at a professional level.

I seem to agree with pretty much everything you say. Same with Drak, when he's being serious, which admittedly is rare.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 07:51 AM
First bolded statement. The ITF has done everything in their power in order to slow the game down. This was specifically stated by many tournament directors. Also, the cutting out of carpet tournaments easily signifies that the ITF is trying to slow the game down, still.



Second bolded statement. If you truly think you have the same amount of knowledge as a professional tennis player such as Marat Safin, Andre Agassi, or anyone else for that matter that plays this sport for a living, you are utterly stupid. Period. This is the most absurd statement, I have EVER heard in my entire life. UTTERLY STUPID. I don't think anyone here who takes themselves seriously believes that they have as much knowledge about a tennis surface as a professional tennis player, who plays on that surface.
Professional players can be tricked by the opponent they play. Some players hit flatter to make the court seem faster. Others use more topspin and make the court seem slower. I think you are overrating the value of playing on the surface. I'm sure you aren't thinking during the match, how fast this surface is all the time. You are thinking about hitting the ball and your footwork. These days, there are no extremely fast surfaces (Especially now with Carpet being banned) but Wimbledon is one of the fastest. You act like these players are all objective. Your higher standards for them knowing the surface more is being mislead. But continue with your ignorance. It makes for good discussions.

thejoe
01-16-2009, 07:57 AM
Professional players can be tricked by the opponent they play. Some players hit flatter to make the court seem faster. Others use more topspin and make the court seem slower. I think you are overrating the value of playing on the surface. I'm sure you aren't thinking during the match, how fast this surface is all the time. You are thinking about hitting the ball and your footwork. These days, there are no extremely fast surfaces (Especially now with Carpet being banned) but Wimbledon is one of the fastest. You act like these players are all objective. Your higher standards for them knowing the surface more is being mislead. But continue with your ignorance. It makes for good discussions.

He is not ignorant in the sense that he is not unaware of any facts. He states that Wimbledon has been slowed down, which has been backed up by the ITF. Plus, you watch the US Open, and you will see that the courts at Flushing Meadows are quicker than the Centre Court at SW19. That should not be the case. Your stats won't mislead me, as I have a perfectly good pair of eyes to see the court speed with.

I also agree that the pros are better at judging court speed than you or I, but when it is this blindingly obvious, anyone can tell.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 07:59 AM
He is not ignorant in the sense that he is not unaware of any facts. He states that Wimbledon has been slowed down, which has been backed up by the ITF. Plus, you watch the US Open, and you will see that the courts at Flushing Meadows are quicker than the Centre Court at SW19. That should not be the case. Your stats won't mislead me, as I have a perfectly good pair of eyes to see the court speed with.
US Open isn't that fast. I don't know why so many people think it is. I guess Nadal struggles there but he struggles on all hardcourts. It's the surface more then the speed that bothers him on hardcourts. The feel means a big deal to him as movement for Nadal is crucial.

I also agree that the pros are better at judging court speed than you or I, but when it is this blindingly obvious, anyone can tell.
The pros got great reaction time, athleticism, and etc. Being a pro does not require an exact knowledge of court speed between Wimbledon and US Open. There is not much difference. The only way to truly tell is go through all the matches and get all the stats on what actually shows a faster court. A thing many of you continue to dismiss ignorantly. Being a pro also doesn't require being objective. Especially when players like Nadal are succeeding they are no better about being objective. Especially ones that come out of the woodworks. I mean there are so many pro players and past pro players. I'm sure a few will say something to downplay Nadal's success there as it is so slow now.

Gorecki
01-16-2009, 08:01 AM
Professional players can be tricked by the opponent they play. Some players hit flatter to make the court seem faster. Others use more topspin and make the court seem slower. I think you are overrating the value of playing on the surface. I'm sure you aren't thinking during the match, how fast this surface is all the time. You are thinking about hitting the ball and your footwork. These days, there are no extremely fast surfaces (Especially now with Carpet being banned) but Wimbledon is one of the fastest. You act like these players are all objective. Your higher standards for them knowing the surface more is being mislead. But continue with your ignorance. It makes for good discussions.

yes.. they do that to make the court seem faster, not to hit more penetrating shots and\or winners...

thejoe
01-16-2009, 08:01 AM
^I used it as an example, as it is now the quickest slam.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 08:02 AM
Professional players can be tricked by the opponent they play. Some players hit flatter to make the court seem faster. Others use more topspin and make the court seem slower. I think you are overrating the value of playing on the surface. I'm sure you aren't thinking during the match, how fast this surface is all the time. You are thinking about hitting the ball and your footwork. These days, there are no extremely fast surfaces (Especially now with Carpet being banned) but Wimbledon is one of the fastest. You act like these players are all objective. Your higher standards for them knowing the surface more is being mislead. But continue with your ignorance. It makes for good discussions.



The only ignorant person here is you, who truly believes he has as much knowledge about surfaces as a professional player, who's job is to live and breathe tennis. It would be sensible if you were trying to argue that one, two, or even 5 players were being biased about their statements. However, this is not just one player. This is a fairly large number of players, such as Marat Safin, John McEnroe, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, Goran, Pete Sampras, Matts Wilander, Ivan Lendl, Tim Henman, Greg Rusedski, Lleyton Hewitt, Jonas Bjorkman, Andy Roddick, and a whole slew of others.



A tennis player's job is to entertain and win. Otherwise, he does not get paid. I would believe tennis players try and learn the intricacies of a surface, as that would be something that is very important to know about to be successful at a professional level. Since these players have access to these surfaces, and have access to coaches and other tennis authorities that you do not, I'm willing to bet they have quite abit more knowledge about surfaces in the world of professional tennis than you do. Your theories mean nothing when the real world obviously disagrees with you (and it's pretty much the entire world that does disagree with you).



Your attempts at trolling are getting pitiful. If you seriously believe you do have as much knowledge as a professional tennis player, I think you should still be banned due to insane amounts of stupidity or ridiculous amounts of bias. No sane person would ever say, especially considering YOU DO NOT EVEN PLAY TENNIS, they have as much knowledge about tennis surfaces as a professional tennis player does. No one. Not unless that person was also a professional tennis player, a coach, or someone who is very involved in the world of professional tennis.

Blade0324
01-16-2009, 08:03 AM
Wow, I have to say that draw looks quite interesting and there are bound to be some great matches. After all isn't that what we all want, great tennis to watch? All these immature comments back and forth about this draw is hard and that draw is easy and I don't like you and you are an idiot etc. is exhausting and just clutters up the boards. You are really not discussing anything as you each have your opinions that you are steadfast in and nothing anyone says is gonna change that so why waste the time. Geez!!! I can't wait for the tennis to start.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 08:04 AM
yes.. they do that to make the court seem faster, not to hit more penetrating shots and\or winners...


Yes Groecki. Tennis players can create illusions. They are magicians. I mean, Santoro wasn't called The Magician for nothing! He could pull rabbits out of his hat! I'm telling you, it's magic.

vandre
01-16-2009, 08:05 AM
Man....this is really tough for two of my favorite players. I can't believe Hewitt and Gonzo playing each other in the first round. I don't know who to root for. I love both of them. Hopefully, goes to the distance and one wins by 101-99 in the fifth.

yeah that was a pretty brutal draw for hewitt. maybe he picked up some strategy pointers from "the worm".

could be an entertaining match though. if blake (mr. prozac) and gonzo had fireworks at the olympics, just imagine what could happen when hewitt and gonzo take the court!

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 08:07 AM
US Open isn't that fast. I don't know why so many people think it is. I guess Nadal struggles there but he struggles on all hardcourts. It's the surface more then the speed that bothers him on hardcourts. The feel means a big deal to him as movement for Nadal is crucial.

The pros got great reaction time, athleticism, and etc. Being a pro does not require an exact knowledge of court speed between Wimbledon and US Open. There is not much difference. The only way to truly tell is go through all the matches and get all the stats on what actually shows a faster court. A thing many of you continue to dismiss ignorantly.



As stated before, a key integral part to winning any conflict is to have the most amount of knowledge. Knowing how a surface plays, and how it affects you would probably be an important key to winning. I'm pretty sure tennis players spend a significant amount of time figuring out what works best on what surface. They also learn the small intricate little details that help them win on that surface. It's called "Knowledge of the Surfaces". I'm pretty sure they know more about it than you do.


Again, you are epic failing at your trolling attempts. You should seriously be banned for what you are doing, as it's not even funny.



Also, your statistics are not correct according to the International Tennis Federation. They are the tennis authorities, and I'm pretty sure they know what they are talking about. Last time I checked, you said they "made it up". Another statement that would have gotten you banned on plenty of other forums.

drakulie
01-16-2009, 08:08 AM
US Open isn't that fast.

For once>>> you are correct. The US Open has also been slowed down. However, it is still faster than Wimbledon.

seffina
01-16-2009, 08:08 AM
Why is it SO important which surface is faster?

Blade0324
01-16-2009, 08:10 AM
As stated before, a key integral part to winning any conflict is to have the most amount of knowledge. Knowing how a surface plays, and how it affects you would probably be an important key to winning. I'm pretty sure tennis players spend a significant amount of time figuring out what works best on what surface. They also learn the small intricate little details that help them win on that surface. It's called "Knowledge of the Surfaces". I'm pretty sure they know more about it than you do.


I would agree that players are probably aware of the speed of the surface and how it's playing, but as for them being experts on it I really doubt it as do I doubt they spend much time worrying about it. They know what small changes need to be made to their game for surface but I'm sure they spend more time thinking about what adjustments they need to make for the person across the court and their own game then how fast or slow the surface is.

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 08:14 AM
I would agree that players are probably aware of the speed of the surface and how it's playing, but as for them being experts on it I really doubt it as do I doubt they spend much time worrying about it. They know what small changes need to be made to their game for surface but I'm sure they spend more time thinking about what adjustments they need to make for the person across the court and their own game then how fast or slow the surface is.


Knowing how the surface plays is integral to what shots a professional player should be using. This is coming from experience from someone who actually plays tennis (unlike Nadal_Freak). If you do not know how a surface plays, you will not know which shot in your arsenal will be effective. For instance, Agassi was well known to play more up the middle at Wimbledon, because towards the end of the tournament, his flat hard hitting shots would erratically bounce due to the grass. Sampras is another example, who S&Ved constantly early during his career at Wimbledon, however played more of a baseline oriented game when he played on slower HCs like the Australian Open, Indian Wells, or Miami.


Adaptation and knowledge are usually the two biggest things as to why professional players are so good on certain surfaces. Nadal is great on claycourts not only because of his defensive natured game, but because he knows the clay so well. He knows how to stretch the court, how to attack on it, he knows how to defend on it, he knows nearly everything you could possibly think of. As one dimensional as his game is, his claycourt game is very complex in nature, simply due to the amount of angles, spins, and variety he gives you on clay. Outside of clay, it's a different story. Agassi excelled primarily on slow HCs because of the physical nature of his game. He applied his physical nature of his game to these courts, by punishing the opponent by yanking them around left and right. However, when he played on faster surfaces such as grass or fast HCs, he adapted to the surface due to his knowledge, and went for more outright winners and aggressive returns.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 08:14 AM
Your attempts at trolling are getting pitiful. If you seriously believe you do have as much knowledge as a professional tennis player, I think you should still be banned due to insane amounts of stupidity or ridiculous amounts of bias. No sane person would ever say, especially considering YOU DO NOT EVEN PLAY TENNIS, they have as much knowledge about tennis surfaces as a professional tennis player does. No one. Not unless that person was also a professional tennis player, a coach, or someone who is very involved in the world of professional tennis.
You should be banned for continuing to misquote me. I did not say I know more about tennis then anyone. Also I have played a lot of tennis in the past. So that is a lie about me as well. I have great knowledge of the game over a decade and a half of watching tennis. But the difference is so small that it would be really hard to be exact by watching or playing tennis visually or playing on those courts. The more meaningful adjustment between them is the movement. Grass is much different in that way. That in itself changes in what shots work best. You got to be safer on grass for the most part from the baseline as you'll make more errors otherwise.

Rabbit
01-16-2009, 08:15 AM
Well the stats back me up. Maybe the courts are slightly slower and higher bouncing but not that much difference. I think it has more to do with the racquets and maybe the balls are heavier which I think they could've done with all the tournaments on the ATP Tour to slow things down. Look at the ace counts though. Still very fast.


Where does it say I know more? It says I know the same as they do. I researched more then they have though on the stats. They can be equally biased. Also there is definitely a lot of people that hate grinders in general. Nadal is more then that but they think of him as that as he used to be more of just a grinder. Thus they want to think he can't win on grass courts or they think S&V would actually have success like they used to if they sped things up.


If you watched that match in Toronto, you would notice how much higher the ball was bouncing there compared to the US Open. I was speculating that maybe it was the balls that allow for a higher bounce and are heavier. Yeah I shouldn't have stated it like I knew exactly what it was.

Professional players can be tricked by the opponent they play. Some players hit flatter to make the court seem faster. Others use more topspin and make the court seem slower. I think you are overrating the value of playing on the surface. I'm sure you aren't thinking during the match, how fast this surface is all the time. You are thinking about hitting the ball and your footwork. These days, there are no extremely fast surfaces (Especially now with Carpet being banned) but Wimbledon is one of the fastest. You act like these players are all objective. Your higher standards for them knowing the surface more is being mislead. But continue with your ignorance. It makes for good discussions.

I'd like to nominate these two posts as the most entertaining of the year. I know it's early, but these have got to be considered....

veritech
01-16-2009, 08:16 AM
I would agree that players are probably aware of the speed of the surface and how it's playing, but as for them being experts on it I really doubt it as do I doubt they spend much time worrying about it. They know what small changes need to be made to their game for surface but I'm sure they spend more time thinking about what adjustments they need to make for the person across the court and their own game then how fast or slow the surface is.

but wouldn't you agree that those who test drive a car would hold more knowledge of it than those who read about it?

while you are correct, i think pros do acknowledge the court speed and have more experienced opinions than we do.

TennezSport
01-16-2009, 08:23 AM
For once I finally think that the draw is evenly divided and tough on both sides, unlike the cake walk that Nads had last year. The only reason that people are complaining about Nads draw is that he has to face a number of players that can actually hurt him on HC. If they do not knock him out they wear him down for the next dangerous player. :shock:

Hey it's called a Grand Slam and that is what Pro players live for. Now that he is #1 let's see him perform like one. If he can win it, he deserves it, not like getting to the semis again and playing no major threat. Just my .05 (inflation). 2K9 will be a very interesting year, just look at the madness that has already started here :twisted:

Cheers, TennezSport :cool:

Blade0324
01-16-2009, 08:23 AM
^^I would agree that playing would provide more knowledge than just reading about it. I can certainly agree that pros to make adjustments to their game depending on the court all I'm saying is that the adjustments are somewhat small and those with experience pretty much know what they need to do different for surface based on previous matches. I'm simply saying that the person across the net has a bigger influence on their game than the court surface.

0d1n
01-16-2009, 08:25 AM
Am I in the wrong place or is this thread called : Australian Open draw out???
I may be a man of limited intelligence but this thread title seems to invite discussions with regards to this draw...to the matches that are to follow and such.
Since when was this thread transformed into "the surface of which grand slam is faster, and who is in the best position to know how fast it is, me - internet anonymous specialist wannabe person, or an ATP player who actually practiced and played matches on that surface"?!?!??

NamRanger
01-16-2009, 08:26 AM
You should be banned for continuing to misquote me. I did not say I know more about tennis then anyone. Also I have played a lot of tennis in the past. So that is a lie about me as well. I have great knowledge of the game over a decade and a half of watching tennis. But the difference is so small that it would be really hard to be exact by watching or playing tennis visually or playing on those courts. The more meaningful adjustment between them is the movement. Grass is much different in that way. That in itself changes in what shots work best. You got to be safer on grass for the most part from the baseline as you'll make more errors otherwise.



Where have I misquoted you? You stated that professional tennis players do not have more knowledge about surfaces than tennis fans. That means you consider them equals. By stating your so called vast amounts of knowledge, you are implying that you know more about surfaces than they do, which is a flat out lie.


If you should be playing safer on grass, why is it in the 90s and before, players played high risk and aggressive games, such as S&V or very hard flat hitting allcourt types of games, with very little to no spin? Clay is the surface you play safe types of shots on, not grass.


You obviously have not played enough tennis to know that a professional tennis player must have a certain amount of knowledge about a surface to be successful. Yes, he does not need to necessarily know exact numbers, but I'm pretty sure he needs to know quite abit to be successful on the tour. Otherwise, we wouldn't have surface specialists.

DJG
01-16-2009, 08:40 AM
Unfortunately, I have to agree - SW19 is not the fastest around and the US Open is considered faster.

However, in Nafal's defence, Queens Club has not been slowed down, it is still damn fast. So the boy can play. Heck even on slower SW19 courts his results for the past 3 years on grass do speak for themselves. Those are the courts at SW19, all players needs to live with them and the results.

Alexio92
01-16-2009, 08:42 AM
Nadal doesnt have a hard draw, wtf are people on about. if anything he has an easy draw compared to what he could of had.

Nadal_Freak
01-16-2009, 08:45 AM
Where have I misquoted you? You stated that professional tennis players do not have more knowledge about surfaces than tennis fans. That means you consider them equals. By stating your so called vast amounts of knowledge, you are implying that you know more about surfaces than they do, which is a flat out lie.


If you should be playing safer on grass, why is it in the 90s and before, players played high risk and aggressive games, such as S&V or very hard flat hitting allcourt types of games, with very little to no spin? Clay is the surface you play safe types of shots on, not grass.


You obviously have not played enough tennis to know that a professional tennis player must have a certain amount of knowledge about a surface to be successful. Yes, he does not need to necessarily know exact numbers, but I'm pretty sure he needs to know quite abit to be successful on the tour. Otherwise, we wouldn't have surface specialists.
Here is what worked in the past on grass. You hit a slice which is a pretty safe shot that stays low and you come to the net to avoid having to hit too many funny bounces. The strings weren't as good in the past and it was harder to hit passing shots. Not too many players succeeded on grass by playing like Blake. Agassi did it but he wasn't exactly trying to end points instantly. He had some safety on his shots. Grass is by no means a grounds for playing as safe as clay. It is not as good for players that try to take everything early from the baseline. You gotta find a happy medium between going for broke and clay court style. Nadal found that as well as Federer. The slice is still a great shot on grass.

Sentinel
01-16-2009, 09:00 AM
So in a nutshell which big seeds are Fed Nadal and Murray meeting ??

ksbh
01-16-2009, 09:30 AM
Can someone create a separate section so Namranger and Nadal_freak can slug it out there?

veroniquem
01-16-2009, 09:32 AM
So in a nutshell which big seeds are Fed Nadal and Murray meeting ??
Nadal: Tursunov, Gasquet, Gonzalez, Monfils, Almagro, Karlovic, Simon.

Federer: Safin, Berdych, Wawrinka, Ferrer, Cilic, Lopez, Del Potro

Murray: Melzer, Stepanek, Verdasco, Blake, Andreev, Schuettler, Tsonga.

MajinX
01-16-2009, 10:03 AM
roddick's draw looks terrible... lol he has a chance to revenge his 5 set lost to PK at the third round (or he can lose to him again...) but even if he beats him he has nalbandian who can play amazing at times, and he seems to be doing well as he is in the final of sydney.

Federer's draw seems to be full of ppl he usually beats, doesnt get hard until after quaters for him. and he has djokovic as his highest seed for the semi's not murray or nadal.

TW Staff
01-16-2009, 10:17 AM
***Thread Closed for Clean up***

TW Staff