PDA

View Full Version : What would have happened if the Rafa and Federer met in last years US Open?


THERAFA
04-10-2009, 01:23 AM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 01:39 AM
Come to think of it teh Rafa looked really worn out (from Verdasco) in the Aust Open Final yet it didn't really get in the way, so I guess that post-Olympic tiredness wouldn't really have got in the way had he played Federer in USO Final. The question would more be about the court surface and whether you think that extra hardcourt speed would give Federer enough edge. Also consider Federer's form at the time, was he playing better in that US Open than he played in the Aust Open, or worse? Or is it all mental and Federer just can't beat the Rafa in a GS Final regardless of the court/form etc. ?

Josherer
04-10-2009, 01:54 AM
Fed was in form during that tourney. I would have expected him to win.

Take this vid of Joker Vs Fed US Open semis for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFdUvSdl9Ms

Both Fed and Djokovic were playing at such a high quality.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 02:02 AM
I think we are certain to get the Rafa Federer matchup in this year's US Open, I think Federer regardless of his struggles has an aura at the US Open and guys are scared of him there and give away leads to him because of how long its been since Federer lost at the US Open, so I'm sure we'll see the matchup this season.

Josherer
04-10-2009, 02:15 AM
I think we are certain to get the Rafa Federer matchup in this year's US Open, I think Federer regardless of his struggles has an aura at the US Open and guys are scared of him there and give away leads to him because of how long its been since Federer lost at the US Open, so I'm sure we'll see the matchup this season.

Yeah you look to be right. I can't see Nadal being troubled by anyone really.

IMO he only lost to DelPotro because he was so fatigued (plus he played poorly compared to usual)

If Fed regains his from after his back injury (like he regained his form last eyar after illness) I think him vs Nadal in the US Open with the crowd roaring will be absolutly brilliant!

Josherer
04-10-2009, 02:15 AM
I think we are certain to get the Rafa Federer matchup in this year's US Open, I think Federer regardless of his struggles has an aura at the US Open and guys are scared of him there and give away leads to him because of how long its been since Federer lost at the US Open, so I'm sure we'll see the matchup this season.

Yeah you look to be right. I can't see Nadal being troubled by anyone really.

IMO he only lost to DelPotro because he was so fatigued (plus he played poorly compared to usual)

If Fed regains his from after his back injury (like he regained his form last eyar after illness) I think him vs Nadal in the US Open with the crowd roaring will be absolutly brilliant!

Josherer
04-10-2009, 02:16 AM
I think we are certain to get the Rafa Federer matchup in this year's US Open, I think Federer regardless of his struggles has an aura at the US Open and guys are scared of him there and give away leads to him because of how long its been since Federer lost at the US Open, so I'm sure we'll see the matchup this season.

Yeah you look to be right. I can't see Nadal being troubled by anyone really.

IMO he only lost to DelPotro because he was so fatigued (plus he played poorly compared to usual)

If Fed regains his from after his back injury (like he regained his form last eyar after illness) I think him vs Nadal in the US Open with the crowd roaring will be absolutly brilliant!

Hope
04-10-2009, 03:03 AM
IF is not a score in tennis. Nadal DID NOT get to the final.

miyagi
04-10-2009, 03:06 AM
Hmmm? I dont know if Fed played any better at USO (bar the final) than he did at the A.O.

Besides Nadal was obviously very tired after the Vedasco match and Fed still couldn't win.

Not convinced Fed can win at any point against Nadal in a slam situation but he might prove us wrong and start spanking Nadal!

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 03:12 AM
Yeah you look to be right. I can't see Nadal being troubled by anyone really.

IMO he only lost to DelPotro because he was so fatigued (plus he played poorly compared to usual)

If Fed regains his from after his back injury (like he regained his form last eyar after illness) I think him vs Nadal in the US Open with the crowd roaring will be absolutly brilliant!

I wouldn't worry about Del Potro in a REAL match (aka Grand Slam), there are a lot of players that could beat Nadal in a non-slam event but none of them could beat him in a slam.

Josherer
04-10-2009, 03:59 AM
IF is not a score in tennis. Nadal DID NOT get to the final.

Noob......

maximo
04-10-2009, 04:03 AM
Fed was in form during that tourney. I would have expected him to win.

Take this vid of Joker Vs Fed US Open semis for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFdUvSdl9Ms

Both Fed and Djokovic were playing at such a high quality.

Christ, Fed's forehand has gone down the drain since the USO...

caulcano
04-10-2009, 04:21 AM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

IMHO, it would have been close like the Wimbledon & AO final.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 04:34 AM
^^ Yep that seems to be the trend, the Rafa clutchness seems to be the reason the Rafa is winnin each time, always 5-setters.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 04:54 AM
Is it just me, or are the mods on holidays?

I mean seriously! :shock:

Huh? Do you deny that the matchup tactically favors Nadal heavily? How many straight wins is it now, 5? Just saying, even a tired Nadal (like at the Aust Open Final) would probably win, considering the trouble Federer has had everytime.

jelle v
04-10-2009, 05:00 AM
"The" Rafa..? Seriously.. :rolleyes:

Pirao
04-10-2009, 05:17 AM
Fed would have won, probably.

jamesblakefan#1
04-10-2009, 05:36 AM
IF is not a score in tennis. Nadal DID NOT get to the final.

What if is always fun to do, not just in tennis,but in life. I think that its a fair question, especially now that rafas proven he can win a HC GS when so many said he couldnt, all while beating Fed in the process.

IMO, Fed would've won because IF Rafa had beaten Murray in the Semis, he would've had to do it in a 5-setter seeing as how he was down after the rain delayed play for a day. So I think having to play 3 consecutive days would've been too much for Rafa.

vtmike
04-10-2009, 05:56 AM
Nadal would've been bagelled which would have improved Federer's confidence...This confidence would have prevented Fed's implosion in the fifth set of the AO '09!

P_Agony
04-10-2009, 05:56 AM
After the Federer-Andreev match, Federer woke up, and demolished everything in his way, including Djokovic and Murray. Djokovic played some really high quality tennis there but Federer was just too goo. I believe he would have beat Rafa too, plus the courts are faster than in the AO.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 05:58 AM
That 2nd set Federer played v Murray in the USO Final is the worst set I've seen Federer play in a Grand Slam for a long time. The fact he got away with it said a lot about Murray's mental state. It was worse than the 5th set of Aust Open Final.

jelle v
04-10-2009, 06:04 AM
That 2nd set Federer played v Murray in the USO Final is the worst set I've seen Federer play in a Grand Slam for a long time. The fact he got away with it said a lot about Murray's mental state. It was worse than the 5th set of Aust Open Final.

Yes we get it by now.. everyone chokes against Federer and every Nadal victory is epic.. Murray was horrible and Fed got lucky.. seriously, we get it..

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 06:06 AM
Murray is a rookie, he reminds me of Agassi's first few slam Finals (Agassi lost RG 90, RG 91, US Open 90, and he was the favorite in 2 of those 3 Finals). There is no disguising this and its why Murray isn't a true threat yet.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 06:09 AM
Fed uses too much topspin which Nadal loves. It's not just about Fed using a one-handed backhand. I'm thinking Nadal in 5 sets.

cknobman
04-10-2009, 06:16 AM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

Like your post says Rafa was energy sapped which his why he didnt make it in the first place.

Roger was playing good at that time so it probably would have been an even worse beating than Roger gave Murray.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 06:20 AM
^^ Yeah but Rafa looked energy sapped in the Aust Open Final too, played a pretty scrappy match, so its hard to say he wouldn't beat Federer based on that. Murray beat the Rafa in US semi, but Murray also beat the Rafa in several other matches of late, obviously Murray hurts the Rafa more than Federer does, he makes the Rafa run a lot more.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 06:26 AM
^^ Yeah but Rafa looked energy sapped in the Aust Open Final too, played a pretty scrappy match, so its hard to say he wouldn't beat Federer based on that. Murray beat the Rafa in US semi, but Murray also beat the Rafa in several other matches of late, obviously Murray hurts the Rafa more than Federer does, he makes the Rafa run a lot more.
Agreed. Murray is a different kind of beast. He gives Rafa much more trouble. Nadal has to stay away from Murray's backhand which his main part of his game is best against exploiting with Federer.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 06:33 AM
Ever since the US Open I've considered Murray the most important player in the world for the Rafa to defeat. So the 6-1 6-2 result was major candy, very big psychologically.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 06:36 AM
Ever since the US Open I've considered Murray the most important player in the world for the Rafa to defeat. So the 6-1 6-2 result was major candy, very big psychologically.
Yeah that was an amazing performance from Nadal. Maybe his best match ever on hardcourts.

batz
04-10-2009, 06:39 AM
Come to think of it teh Rafa looked really worn out (from Verdasco) in the Aust Open Final yet it didn't really get in the way, so I guess that post-Olympic tiredness wouldn't really have got in the way had he played Federer in USO Final. The question would more be about the court surface and whether you think that extra hardcourt speed would give Federer enough edge. Also consider Federer's form at the time, was he playing better in that US Open than he played in the Aust Open, or worse? Or is it all mental and Federer just can't beat the Rafa in a GS Final regardless of the court/form etc. ?


Hold the bus a minute. You argued until you were blue in the face the other day that the ONLY reason Rafa lost to Murray at the USO was because he was tired due to the Olympics!:shock:

batz
04-10-2009, 06:45 AM
Ever since the US Open I've considered Murray the most important player in the world for the Rafa to defeat. So the 6-1 6-2 result was major candy, very big psychologically.

The next time the two of them play in 50 mph winds, this thrashing might have a bearing on the psychology of the match. Just like the bagel Rafa got from Murray in Rotterdam might have a psycholgical bearing the next time he plays Murray carrying an injury.

Leaving facetiousness to one side for a minute, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't read too much into the result at IW given the pretty unique context, just as you shouldn't read too much into Murray's bagelling in the defeat of Rafa at Rotterdam.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 06:46 AM
The next time the two of them play in 50 mph winds, this thrashing might have a bearing on the psychology of the match. Just like the bagel Rafa got from Murray in Rotterdam might have a psycholgical bearing the next time he plays Murray carrying an injury.

Leaving facetiousness to one side for a minute, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't read too much into the result at IW given the pretty unique context, just as you shouldn't read too much into Murray's bagelling in the defeat of Rafa at Rotterdam.
It was 25 mph winds. Get it right.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 06:50 AM
Hold the bus a minute. You argued until you were blue in the face the other day that the ONLY reason Rafa lost to Murray at the USO was because he was tired due to the Olympics!:shock:

Murray makes the Rafa run A LOT, so when the Rafa is tired he will lose to Murray. Whereas Federer doesn't take advantage, he makes too many errors v the Rafa and the stamina therefore isn't tested 100%. Murray is more dangerous because he can extend the rally relentlessly.

batz
04-10-2009, 06:52 AM
It was 25 mph winds. Get it right.

http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/03/23/nadal-reminds-murray-numero-uno/

That's the first link of a cursory google search. Turns out I was wrong; there were gusts to 60 mph according to that report.

There are lots of other reports saying 40 mph to 60 mph. None of them seem to say 25mph though.

What was that you were saying about getting it right?

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 06:54 AM
The next time the two of them play in 50 mph winds, this thrashing might have a bearing on the psychology of the match. Just like the bagel Rafa got from Murray in Rotterdam might have a psycholgical bearing the next time he plays Murray carrying an injury.

Leaving facetiousness to one side for a minute, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't read too much into the result at IW given the pretty unique context, just as you shouldn't read too much into Murray's bagelling in the defeat of Rafa at Rotterdam.

The windiest conditions I ever SAW was Federer v Agassi QF at the US OPEN, so I wouldn't rule out seeing Murray in the same position in New York as he was in Miami. Agassi would take his racquet back for a forehand and then suddenly fall almost to his knees as the ball suddenly is unreachable. I don't care what the wind rate was in Miami, the swirl in Ashe Stadium makes the wind more difficult, at least in the Agassi-Federer match.

batz
04-10-2009, 07:01 AM
The windiest conditions I ever SAW was Federer v Agassi QF at the US OPEN, so I wouldn't rule out seeing Murray in the same position in New York as he was in Miami. Agassi would take his racquet back for a forehand and then suddenly fall almost to his knees as the ball suddenly is unreachable. I don't care what the wind rate was in Miami, the swirl in Ashe Stadium makes the wind more difficult, at least in the Agassi-Federer match.

So you can think of ONE other occasion when the wind was comparable to that day in Miami. Which kind of proves my point.

Just to be clear; Rafa was 100% deserving of his victory that day. I just think it's kinda daft to be extrapolating things from a match where the conditions are unlikely to be repeated.

Josherer
04-10-2009, 07:04 AM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

Yeah that's true. Though if Fed kept up his great form throughout US and was to meet Nadal in the finals I would have to give it to him.

Then again lookng at the history one might favour Nadal even though Fed was playing so well.

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:07 AM
So you can think of ONE other occasion when the wind was comparable to that day in Miami. Which kind of proves my point.

Just to be clear; Rafa was 100% deserving of his victory that day. I just think it's kinda daft to be extrapolating things from a match where the conditions are unlikely to be repeated.

What it does prove is that Murray is so fragile that his entire chance of victory at the US Open can go from good to zero (6-1 6-2) all because of windy conditions. I don't know of a top player with a difficency like that, and that is why you wouldn't put money on him winning the US Open. And who knows how many different wind conditions Murray would bow to; we'll find out over the years.

vtmike
04-10-2009, 07:09 AM
Nadal prevented himself from getting a straight sets beatdown by going out to Murray in the semis

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:13 AM
Federer never beats the Rafa.

egn
04-10-2009, 07:14 AM
Murray is a rookie, he reminds me of Agassi's first few slam Finals (Agassi lost RG 90, RG 91, US Open 90, and he was the favorite in 2 of those 3 Finals). There is no disguising this and its why Murray isn't a true threat yet.

Agassi was different than Murray. Agassi was a troubled youth he used to throw big games when he was a junior to make his dad angry. He never knew how to handle the pressure games because he was used to giving up on them, Murray just got beat down. Murray was definitely a threat, half of tennis is mental. Murray was intimidated.

^^ Yeah but Rafa looked energy sapped in the Aust Open Final too, played a pretty scrappy match, so its hard to say he wouldn't beat Federer based on that. Murray beat the Rafa in US semi, but Murray also beat the Rafa in several other matches of late, obviously Murray hurts the Rafa more than Federer does, he makes the Rafa run a lot more.

It was two different kinds of energy saped. AO was short term damage, he was tired from a match, Rafa at the USO it was long term the wear and tear of the season was taking him down, I think the second is more dangerous to him than the first. Fed could have probably won the USO due to Rafa being exhausted, but I think Fed would have still found a way to lose.

vtmike
04-10-2009, 07:16 AM
Federer never beats the Rafa.

Ok The Nadal_Freak 2.0

carlos djackal
04-10-2009, 07:17 AM
Although Fatigue IMO it could have been a close one just like in this year's AO but I still think Nadal would be the victor.....I just feel that Fed has his mental game collapsing when facing Nadal.....Nadal just owns Fed for a while now.....

jelle v
04-10-2009, 07:20 AM
Federer never beats the Rafa.

The Federer has already beaten the Rafa... The Murray has also beaten the Rafa.. The Del Potro has beaten the Rafa.. the Rafa is not invincible..

Seriously.. stop it with "the Rafa", it's just pathetic..

Josherer
04-10-2009, 07:22 AM
Nadal prevented himself from getting a straight sets beatdown by going out to Murray in the semis

Hehe suttle :)

batz
04-10-2009, 07:25 AM
What it does prove is that Murray is so fragile that his entire chance of victory at the US Open can go from good to zero (6-1 6-2) all because of windy conditions. I don't know of a top player with a difficency like that, and that is why you wouldn't put money on him winning the US Open. And who knows how many different wind conditions Murray would bow to; we'll find out over the years.

Yeah, but he hasn't lost this year to a guy who'd never taken a set off him after being 3-0 and a break up in the final set. I don't know of any other top player with a deficiency like that, who knows how many other times Rafa will bow to that kind of collapse, we'll find out over the years.

It's not just you who can wildly extrapolate stupid conclusions on the basis of what happened in one match.

And just to be clear, we're not talking about 'windy conditions' we're talking about 45 -60 mph gusts. Miami had windy conditions - remind me again who won the title in those conditions?

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:28 AM
The Federer has already beaten the Rafa... The Murray has also beaten the Rafa.. The Del Potro has beaten the Rafa.. the Rafa is not invincible..

Seriously.. stop it with "the Rafa", it's just pathetic..

You'll never see Del Pot beat the Rafa at a slam. Just about anyone in the top 20 whereas could beat the Rafa at a non-slam, very doable. The Rafa's mental a-game only comes in the slams, because he knows using it in the non-slams will result in longterm burnout. That isn't to say the Rafa isn't giving 100% in nonslam, in fact he is giving 100% physically in nonslams but he doesn't peel his eyes at the ball with the same intensity. I've experienced the same concept myself, in tennis training I'll give 100% (physically) but I won't fight mentally as hard as I would in a match. So he plays looser mentally in nonslams hence the massive amounts of unforced errors that he wouldn't commit in a slam match.

batz
04-10-2009, 07:34 AM
You'll never see Del Pot beat the Rafa at a slam. Just about anyone in the top 20 whereas could beat the Rafa at a non-slam, very doable. The Rafa's mental a-game only comes in the slams, because he knows using it in the non-slams will result in longterm burnout. That isn't to say the Rafa isn't giving 100% in nonslam, in fact he is giving 100% physically in nonslams but he doesn't peel his eyes at the ball with the same intensity. I've experienced the same concept myself, in tennis training I'll give 100% (physically) but I won't fight mentally as hard as I would in a match. So he plays looser mentally in nonslams hence the massive amounts of unforced errors that he wouldn't commit in a slam match.

And even if Rafa does lose to someone in a slam, it's only because he is tired - right?

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:37 AM
If the Rafa lost to Federer in a slam it wouldn't be due to the Rafa's tiredness, because we know Federer can't exploit it, he doesn't move the Rafa around, doesn't keep the ball in play. If Federer beat the Rafa it would be for some other unforseen reason tactically related or mentally (if they switched minds and the Rafa became a choker).

Whereas if Murray played the Rafa when the Rafa was running on empty then Murray would definitely win.

jelle v
04-10-2009, 07:40 AM
You are just one big troll, aren't you..?

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:42 AM
Just answering your questions, nothing more nothing less.

jelle v
04-10-2009, 07:48 AM
Just answering your questions, nothing more nothing less.

No.. you are trolling with your "the Rafa".. it's real obvious and truly pathetic..

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:55 AM
I learnt it a while ago when Federer was called "The Federer" by his fans. Thanks for the tip!

Josherer
04-10-2009, 08:36 AM
We all know the two top guys in all the slams are, atm, Fed and Nadal.

There's no doubt about that!

Josherer
04-10-2009, 08:51 AM
If the Rafa lost to Federer in a slam it wouldn't be due to the Rafa's tiredness, because we know Federer can't exploit it, he doesn't move the Rafa around, doesn't keep the ball in play. If Federer beat the Rafa it would be for some other unforseen reason tactically related or mentally (if they switched minds and the Rafa became a choker).

Whereas if Murray played the Rafa when the Rafa was running on empty then Murray would definitely win.

No. If Fed is at his peak again and not missing as much as he has been off late, he could simply hit Nadal off court.

theduh
04-10-2009, 09:01 AM
Ok The Nadal_Freak 2.0

Thought it was Mungo 2.0. Man they are evolving like.... I don't want to say it :)

vtmike
04-10-2009, 09:04 AM
Thought it was Mungo 2.0. Man they are evolving like.... I don't want to say it :)

Oh that guy is past troll status...He is an annoying *&^%$#@#$%^& Ok I don't want to say it ;)

Serendipitous
04-10-2009, 09:33 AM
I think if Nadal somehow got past Murray and made it to the final he would have been to tired to play at 100 percent. He would have lost. At that stage in the year he was extremely tired, more so than he was against Federer at this year's AO.

deltox
04-10-2009, 09:33 AM
Federer never beats the Rafa.

your so one sided your opinions are not taken seriously

your now speaking about rafa as though he can take every HC GS, which is NOT the case. he has a good chance but to say he will easily even reach the finals on HC slams is a bit premature. There are many other dangerous players on HCs that rafa has to deal with, ALOT more than on grass and clay.

deltox
04-10-2009, 09:35 AM
If the Rafa lost to Federer in a slam it wouldn't be due to the Rafa's tiredness, because we know Federer can't exploit it, he doesn't move the Rafa around, doesn't keep the ball in play. If Federer beat the Rafa it would be for some other unforseen reason tactically related or mentally (if they switched minds and the Rafa became a choker).

Whereas if Murray played the Rafa when the Rafa was running on empty then Murray would definitely win.

soo lemme make sure i understand this remark. noone can beat rafa, only conditions, humidity, and unforseen natural disasters can cause him to loose in a GS right?

Serve_Ace
04-10-2009, 09:43 AM
soo lemme make sure i understand this remark. noone can beat rafa, only conditions, humidity, and unforseen natural disasters can cause him to loose in a GS right?

Anything short of Armageddon you mean.

theduh
04-10-2009, 09:47 AM
soo lemme make sure i understand this remark. noone can beat rafa, only conditions, humidity, and unforseen natural disasters can cause him to loose in a GS right?

Pretty much sums it all and oh don't forget the ultimate reason "tiredness"

FD3S
04-10-2009, 09:53 AM
Federer probably would have won. His level of play was still freakishly high, and his serve percentage wasn't crap. Against that Federer, Nadal's fatigue could quite possibly be a factor.

Lotto
04-10-2009, 11:03 AM
Fed was playing insanely well at the US Open. Very aggressive brilliant tennis. There's no doubt he would have beaten Rafa, in probably 4, maybe 5 sets.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 02:18 PM
http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/03/23/nadal-reminds-murray-numero-uno/

That's the first link of a cursory google search. Turns out I was wrong; there were gusts to 60 mph according to that report.

There are lots of other reports saying 40 mph to 60 mph. None of them seem to say 25mph though.

What was that you were saying about getting it right?
Gusts means wind at its max. Just like a tornado is the wind at its max. Its not the average wind. The average actually died some during Nadal's match. It was worse in the womans final.

Nadal_Freak
04-10-2009, 02:20 PM
Fed was playing insanely well at Wimbledon until he met Nadal.
I agree. Nadal is a momentum killer for Federer.

egn
04-10-2009, 02:23 PM
I agree. Nadal is a momentum killer for Federer.

Third that one. Fed sees Nadal and really it just ruins him.

AprilFool
04-10-2009, 03:11 PM
It would have been a three setter. Federer.

pound cat
04-10-2009, 03:23 PM
Federer would have sobbed at the ceremony.

Nadal in 5

Parabolica
04-10-2009, 04:50 PM
Fed in 3. No doubt about it.

veroniquem
04-10-2009, 05:22 PM
Maybe we'll see what happens this year...

DunlopDood
04-10-2009, 05:25 PM
With the way that federer was playing at that tournament, nothing out of the ordinary. In other words Federer wins!

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:41 PM
soo lemme make sure i understand this remark. noone can beat rafa, only conditions, humidity, and unforseen natural disasters can cause him to loose in a GS right?

No, thats not what I said, though I guess you were going for a laugh anyway, but what I said was Federer would beat Nadal if Nadal mentally was weaker. And Federer would beat Nadal if Federer came up with a new tactic that troubled Nadal. But Federer will not beat Nadal merely from tiredness, because we've seen Nadal very tired in the Aust Open and it didn't matter because Federer didn't make him run, Federer piled on the unforced errors instead. Murray whereas tends to produce more consistently off the ground and make Nadal run a lot more, so the Rafa can't afford to play Verdasco for 5 hours before he plays Murray.

Serve_Ace
04-10-2009, 07:46 PM
Coulda, shoulda, woulda, the point is it didn't happen, so move on!

THERAFA
04-10-2009, 07:50 PM
Its a fair question, since we almost saw the matchup occur. A lot less theoretical than many other threads around here. And there is a good chance the matchup will occur this year at US.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-10-2009, 08:00 PM
It's hard to believe how well Fed was playing at the USO 2008 and it was only a few months ago. If Fed played like how he played against Djokovic he would win in 3 sets.

clayman2000
04-10-2009, 08:04 PM
Nadal may have even possibly won.....
In the final Murray clearly was never on from the start, and Federer took advantage
IF Nadal had won, which i no he didnt, and Murray deserved to beat Rafa it would have been a much closer match.
Nadal had Federer rattled and would have been on a complete roll

I think the whole world wished that would have happened becuase it would have been Wimbledon 2.0

crazylevity
04-10-2009, 09:35 PM
Gusts means wind at its max. Just like a tornado is the wind at its max. Its not the average wind. The average actually died some during Nadal's match. It was worse in the womans final.

Now I've heard it all. Gusts=Tornado.

:roll:

Blinkism
04-11-2009, 12:36 AM
Nadal versus Federer in the 2008 final? Not so sure of the result, but it would have been more entertaining than vs. Murray.

There's 2 factors at play, Nadal's willingness and tenacity (as evidenced in the 2009 AO semi and final) and Federer's mental blips and loss of form (as evidenced in the 2009 AO final and in IW-Miami semi's).

If Federer was focused and Nadal was fighting for his life on the court, it could go either way. When Federer does beat Nadal, it's because he's on and focused, but it goes either way. Nadal can hold his own against a 100% Federer, as evidenced by many of the wins he got before Federer developed a mental block when it comes to Nadal (their very first match comes to mind, for example).

TheMagicianOfPrecision
04-11-2009, 06:06 AM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

Stupid speculation,what would have happened if Fed played his best set ever in the 5th against Nadal in Aussie Open? What would have happen if Federer would have converted his bp against Nadal in the 5th set of the final 2008 leading 4-3 and 30-40 2nd serve?

veroniquem
04-11-2009, 01:32 PM
Stupid speculation,what would have happened if Fed played his best set ever in the 5th against Nadal in Aussie Open? What would have happen if Federer would have converted his bp against Nadal in the 5th set of the final 2008 leading 4-3 and 30-40 2nd serve?
Nadal would still have won.

P_Agony
04-11-2009, 01:47 PM
The Federer has already beaten the Rafa... The Murray has also beaten the Rafa.. The Del Potro has beaten the Rafa.. the Rafa is not invincible..

Seriously.. stop it with "the Rafa", it's just pathetic..

Hilarious post. "The Rafa" thing is really pathetic.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 12:36 PM
Yeah you look to be right. I can't see Nadal being troubled by anyone really.

IMO he only lost to DelPotro because he was so fatigued (plus he played poorly compared to usual)

If Fed regains his from after his back injury (like he regained his form last eyar after illness) I think him vs Nadal in the US Open with the crowd roaring will be absolutly brilliant!

So Nadal was fatigued after a couple of tournaments? Ridiculous to say that he lost to DP because of fatigue. That excuse is getting old.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 12:38 PM
Federer was playing too well for Nadal on that day. Would have been 4 sets maximum. That's the best Federer has played since the AO 07 match with Roddick.

GameSampras
04-12-2009, 12:39 PM
I dont think it matters on the surface anymore. I would still give Nadal the slight edge over Roger even at the USO. Nadal is in Roger's head.

fps
04-12-2009, 12:41 PM
he didn't beat murray, he didn't earn the right to play him. you can't rewrite history with hypotheticals.

Serendipitous
04-12-2009, 12:43 PM
^^^^^^^^^

Well said.


That's why I hate these hypothetical topics...... all we can do is argue about things that could happened that never did happen. They're just pointless arguments....

Cyan
04-12-2009, 12:54 PM
We would have seen a much better final, that's for sure. 5 setter and all. Not the crapfest we saw.....

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 12:55 PM
We would have seen a much better final, that's for sure. 5 setter and all. Not the crapfest we saw.....

Yeah. Shame that Murray schooled Nadal in the semis. :(

Cyan
04-12-2009, 12:56 PM
Yeah. Shame that Murray schooled Nadal in the semis. :(

LOL..... Shame that Murray got stage fright and did nothing in the final.... :rolleyes:

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 12:58 PM
Yeah. Shame that Murray schooled Nadal in the semis. :(

Well I wish he never did after his pathetic effort in the final.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 12:59 PM
LOL..... Shame that Murray got stage fright and did nothing in the final.... :rolleyes:

Yeah, that was a shame. If Federer did that to Murray, who put a beating on Rafa, I cringe at the thought of what he would have done to Nadal

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:00 PM
Well I wish he never did after his pathetic effort in the final.

To be fair, we've already ascertained how clueless you are.

You still think Murray is anti-English despite all the evidence we presented to you contradicting that view.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:01 PM
Yeah, that was a shame. If Federer did that to Murray, who put a beating on Rafa, I cringe at the thought of what he would have done to Nadal

What you mean like at the AO?

P_Agony
04-12-2009, 01:02 PM
Well I wish he never did after his pathetic effort in the final.

Wow, no credit to Federer whatsoever huh? I guess Djokovic's effort in the semifinal was poor as well (aside of the fact he actually played great).

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:03 PM
What you mean like at the AO?

No, I mean when Federer was actually playing well, like at the US Open.

I like how you're using a completely different tournament to make a point.

danb
04-12-2009, 01:04 PM
What would have happened what would the score have been? The Rafa looked energy sapped throughout that US Open even in all his straight sets wins, but the matchup tactically is so in favor of the Rafa that do you think he'd have beat Federer or no?

Rafa would win the same way he did at AO (actually easier).

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:05 PM
No, I mean when Federer was actually playing well, like at the US Open.

I like how you're using a completely different tournament to make a point.

Federer played better at the AO than at the USO.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:06 PM
Yeah, that was a shame. If Federer did that to Murray, who put a beating on Rafa, I cringe at the thought of what he would have done to Nadal


Tennis is not like that..... Just because a player beats Rafa and then loses easily to Fed does not mean Rafa would lose easily to Fed as well....

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:06 PM
Wow, no credit to Federer whatsoever huh? I guess Djokovic's effort in the semifinal was poor as well (aside of the fact he actually played great).

Well Djoker took at set off Federer whilst Murray was embrassed.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:08 PM
No, I mean when Federer was actually playing well, like at the US Open.

I like how you're using a completely different tournament to make a point.

Yeah, Fed was playing so well he almost lost to Andreev. :shock:

danb
04-12-2009, 01:10 PM
Federer played better at the AO than at the USO.

I agree with that. At the USO he got lucky because Murray chocked.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:13 PM
Tennis is not like that..... Just because a player beats Rafa and then loses easily to Fed does not mean Rafa would lose easily to Fed as well....

No, you're right. However, when two players play a similar grinding game against Federer, you can infer certain things. Murray gives Federer just as much, if not more, trouble on hard courts than Nadal does. I think Federer would have massacred Nadal that day.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:14 PM
Yeah, Fed was playing so well he almost lost to Andreev. :shock:

That was the 4th round. I think most agree that Federer kicked into high gear in the latter stages of the US Open.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:15 PM
Federer played better at the AO than at the USO.

Keep telling yourself that.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:16 PM
No, you're right. However, when two players play a similar grinding game against Federer, you can infer certain things. Murray gives Federer just as much, if not more, trouble on hard courts than Nadal does. I think Federer would have massacred Nadal that day.

Rafa has beaten Fed SIX times at the slams. Murray has never beaten Fed at a slam..... You know what? If Verdasco had beaten Rafa at the AO, Fed would have massacred Verdasco in the final..... just like he massacred Murray in the USO final. Most players get scared when they play Fed at the slams. Except for Rafa, Nole and Safin....

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:17 PM
Keep telling yourself that.

Federer played great at the AO did you not see his matches against Roddick and Del Potro:confused:

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:18 PM
Rafa has beaten Fed SIX times at the slams. Murray has never beaten Fed at a slam..... You know what? If Verdasco had beaten Rafa at the AO, Fed would have massacred Verdasco in the final.....

I said that Murray gives Federer more trouble on hard courts.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:20 PM
I said that Murray gives Federer more trouble on hard courts.

Wheres the proof Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on HC's and the won he lost he blew a 2 set lead.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:20 PM
Federer played great at the AO did you not see his matches against Roddick and Del Potro:confused:

You do realise that he always beats Roddick and that Federer is a horrible matchup for Del Potro, right? Those weren't great performances. Del Potro was never going to win and everyone saw that he mentally gave up after the first set.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:21 PM
Wheres the proof Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on HC's and the won he lost he blew a 2 set lead.

Murray has a 6-2 record over Federer, all on hard courts. That's the proof. And one of those losses came in 2005, before Murray's first proper year on the tour.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:23 PM
You do realise that he always beats Roddick and that Federer is a horrible matchup for Del Potro, right? Those weren't great performances. Del Potro was never going to win and everyone saw that he mentally gave up after the first set.

If he don't call beating a guy 6-3 6-0 6-0 a great performance what do you call a great performace.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:23 PM
Federer played great at the AO did you not see his matches against Roddick and Del Potro:confused:

Yeah. He even double bagelled Del Potro :shock:

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:23 PM
Wheres the proof Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on HC's and the won he lost he blew a 2 set lead.

And get your facts right, ffs. Federer beat Nadal in Shanghai, too. Possibly somewhere else.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:23 PM
Murray has a 6-2 record over Federer, all on hard courts. That's the proof. And one of those losses came in 2005, before Murray's first proper year on the tour.

Two of those wins were indoors.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:23 PM
I said that Murray gives Federer more trouble on hard courts.

Not at the HC slams, apparently......

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:24 PM
If he don't call beating a guy 6-3 6-0 6-0 a great performance what do you call a great performace.

Beating someone who is not an easy matchup. I'm going to dig out my MTF post and show that the result was easily predicted.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:25 PM
And get your facts right, ffs. Federer beat Nadal in Shanghai, too. Possibly somewhere else.

They were indoors get your facts right pal.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:25 PM
Not at the HC slams, apparently......

You're basing it on one match. You wouldn't make a great scientist, dude.

I can just imagine you declaring that you have a cure for cancer after a test sample of 1 person.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:26 PM
They were indoors get your facts right pal.

Those are still hard courts. Putting a roof overhead does not change that fact.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:26 PM
Commies were even saying after the Roddick and Del Potro matches that Fed was playing at a 2006 level.....

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:27 PM
Beating someone who is not an easy matchup. I'm going to dig out my MTF post and show that the result was easily predicted.

I don't care if it was predicted or he's a bad matchup it was a brilliant performance from Federer.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:28 PM
I don't care if it was predicted or he's a bad matchup it was a brilliant performance from Federer.

Because Del Potro gave up after one set? Everyone saw it.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/3/en/players/headtohead/?player1=Federer%2C+Roger&player2=nadal

Tell me what it says beside "Tennis Masters Cup".

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:29 PM
Those are still hard courts. Putting a roof overhead does not change that fact.

Its still totally different indoors speeds up the court it takes out things such as wind, humidity etc totally different ball game.

thejoe
04-12-2009, 01:30 PM
Miami is a slowish court, US Open is a fastish court. The fact that it is outdoors doesn't change too much.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:31 PM
Because Del Potro gave up after one set? Everyone saw it.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/3/en/players/headtohead/?player1=Federer%2C+Roger&player2=nadal

Tell me what it says beside "Tennis Masters Cup".

Everyone saw the incredible shots by Federer like those half volleys that had nothing to do with Del Potro giving up.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:32 PM
Because Del Potro gave up after one set? Everyone saw it.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/3/en/players/headtohead/?player1=Federer%2C+Roger&player2=nadal

Tell me what it says beside "Tennis Masters Cup".

Federer can spank Nadal indoors then lose to him outdoors just shows how different they are.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:33 PM
Its still totally different indoors speeds up the court it takes out things such as wind, humidity etc totally different ball game.

It is still a hard court. It doesn't matter whether it takes away wind etc. It is still a hard court. Since when do you only count outdoor hard courts? Oh, that's right. When it suits your argument.

Murray has beaten Federer on both outdoor and indoor hard.

The funny thing is, you lose the argument either way. Murray has 2 indoor victories, while Nadal has none. Murray has 4 outdoor victories and Nadal has 3. And Murray has been on tour nowhere near as long.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:35 PM
Federer can spank Nadal indoors then lose to him outdoors just shows how different they are.

Of course they are different, but you can't just use the hard courts that suit your argument. That's not how this works. You can bet you would be using the indoor results if Nadal had won on that surface.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:36 PM
It is still a hard court. It doesn't matter whether it takes away wind etc. It is still a hard court. Since when do you only count outdoor hard courts? Oh, that's right. When it suits your argument.

Murray has beaten Federer on both outdoor and indoor hard.

The funny thing is, you lose the argument either way. Murray has 2 indoor victories, while Nadal has none. Murray has 4 outdoor victories and Nadal has 3. And Murray has been on tour nowhere near as long.

No you lose the Argument because Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on outdoor hard compared to Murray who has a 4-2 lead Nadal has a better win to loss percentage and people always refer it has indoors rather than indoor hard.

Cyan
04-12-2009, 01:40 PM
It is still a hard court. It doesn't matter whether it takes away wind etc. It is still a hard court. Since when do you only count outdoor hard courts? Oh, that's right. When it suits your argument.

Murray has beaten Federer on both outdoor and indoor hard.

The funny thing is, you lose the argument either way. Murray has 2 indoor victories, while Nadal has none. Murray has 4 outdoor victories and Nadal has 3. And Murray has been on tour nowhere near as long.

Nadal has the win that matters.... AO.

batz
04-12-2009, 01:40 PM
No you lose the Argument because Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on outdoor hard compared to Murray who has a 4-2 lead Nadal has a better win to loss percentage and people always refer it has indoors rather than indoor hard.


By 'people', do you mean you?

Even the ATP use Indoor hard/outdoor hard when describing events.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/3/en/tournaments/fullcalendar/

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:41 PM
No you lose the Argument because Nadal has a 3-1 lead over Federer on outdoor hard compared to Murray who has a 4-2 lead Nadal has a better win to loss percentage and people always refer it has indoors rather than indoor hard.

What a moron you are, mate. You just distort the facts constantly. Any other matches you'd like to disregard, or stipulations to add?

A hard court is a hard court. You can't just disregard results when it suits you.

You must be one of those *****s that nobody likes. You're like the anti-Norm. Whenever you walk in a pub, the whole bar groans in unison.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:43 PM
What a moron you are, mate. You just distort the facts constantly. Any other matches you'd like to disregard, or stipulations to add?

A hard court is a hard court. You can't just disregard results when it suits you.

You must be one of those *****s that nobody likes. You're like the anti-Norm. Whenever you walk in a pub, the whole bar groans in unison.

No need to result to personal abuse we are having a tennis discussion here but you have taken things too far.

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:45 PM
No need to result to personal abuse we are having a tennis discussion here but you have taken things too far.

No, mate. I'm trying to discuss tennis with a 2-year-old. If you insist on debating and acting like a child, I'll treat you like one. You bring out the worst in people, as you are hopelessly narrow-minded. You cannot admit when you're wrong. You refused to admit you were wrong about the whole anti-English thing.

Cesc Fabregas
04-12-2009, 01:47 PM
No, mate. I'm trying to discuss tennis with a 2-year-old. If you insist on debating and acting like a child, I'll treat you like one. You bring out the worst in people, as you are hopelessly narrow-minded. You cannot admit when you're wrong. You refused to admit you were wrong about the whole anti-English thing.

Maybe you should look at yourself and the fact that you cannot except others have opinions and you have to result to insults grow up!

Clydey2times
04-12-2009, 01:48 PM
Maybe you should look at yourself and the fact that you cannot except others have opinions and you have to result to insults grow up!

I can accept the opinions of reasonable people. I refuse to accept or respect the opinion of someone who so willingly disregards the facts. You do it time after time.

RFtennis
04-12-2009, 05:09 PM
Rog would have annihilated him.

AprilFool
04-13-2009, 01:51 AM
6-0,6-2,6-4

Tennis_Wiz
04-13-2009, 09:46 AM
Federer would have still won...
HANDS DOWN..