PDA

View Full Version : Federer vs Nadal 2006 Rome Masters Final...Federer should watch this match again...


10sdude85
04-22-2009, 09:07 PM
I am watching this match on The Tennis Channel right now, and I have to say that Federer's game has not changed AT ALL. He is still playing the way he used to, its just that everyone else has stepped up their games. Although Nadal wins this match, Federer played some of the best clay court tennis I have seen from him. I think the difference between Federer then, and Federer now is just the confidence he had with his forehand and serve, and also just his nerves of steel. Even when he went for his shots and missed, he did not choke like he does now. Also now he shanks a lot of shots and has numerous unforced errors. I think watching this match would maybe give Federer a bit of confidence just for the three big claycourt tournaments coming up. HIS VOLLEYS WERE SICK!

Federer_pilon
04-22-2009, 10:04 PM
The Nadal of 2009 would beat the Nadal of 2006 in straight sets. Just saying...

rubberduckies
04-22-2009, 10:08 PM
The problem is that Nadal's level has improved dramatically since that time. From the very beginning, when Rafa crushed Roger in Miami 2004, Fed knew that the day would come when Nadal would overtake him completely. That why he'd always stress how important it was for him to get victories over Nadal while the Spaniard was young. Fed's a pretty shrewd judge of talent, and he instantly recognized that Nadal's talent was so far beyond his own that once Nadal come to even half of his peak there would be no more hope for Roger on any surface.

Federer should absolutely not watch Monte Carlo 2006 if he wants any kind of confidence heading into the clay season. Here he is playing at the absolute limit that his talent could ever possibly allow him to attain, and a green Nadal beats him. The match would only highlight Fed's mediocrity relative to one of the most precocious players in the history of the game.

RoddickAce
04-22-2009, 10:18 PM
Fed should watch his match vs. Nadal at the tennis master's cup 2006, when he would pull off crazy but controlled winners off both wings no matter what the score was, and despite giving 4 consectuive points away with easy misses, still manages to come back and break Nadal with confidence the next game.

timnz
04-22-2009, 10:26 PM
[QUOTE=rubberduckies;3347647].....Fed's a pretty shrewd judge of talent, and he instantly recognized that Nadal's talent was so far beyond his own that once Nadal come to even half of his peak there would be no more hope for Roger on any surface.
QUOTE]

Other than Roland Garros in 2008 - when has Nadal ever crushed Federer in a match. The huge majority of them have been close run things. They way you are speaking is that Roger doesn't have a hope... but he is running Nadal so close even when Roger isn't in the best form. Australian Open 2009 was a 5 set match not 3. Wimbledon was an extremely close 5 sets, Federer was only 2 points from winning it. Yes Nadal is winning these matches, but only just....

Federer has slipped and yes Nadal has got better, but the evidence is that Nadal is only just getting ahead in these matches. In 2007 Federer took a 6-0 off Nadal on Clay in Hamburg! Same year he won first set at Wimbledon against Nadal 6-0.

Bloodshed
04-22-2009, 10:33 PM
Oh how I wanted Fed to win this match soo badly at the time.

When it was 5-6 in the fifth set and Nadal double faulted to give Fed 2 MP (15-40), I said to myself : "Finally Federer will beat Nadal at his absolute best in clay and he should take this victory as a motivation comming to RG". Alas he never converted either MPs nor did he took advantage of the 5-3 lead in the fifth set TB to win the match. Nadal played much better the important points (as usual with any opponents) and that's why he won the Rome MS (something that Fed has yet to achieve and could be the closest he'll ever get to the title).

papucla10
04-22-2009, 11:12 PM
I don't how come people can say Nadal is better than Fed, he can probably be but first he has to achieve what Federer has and hasn't happened just yet, that is it, If you know tennis you can see that nadal is a fighter and his game is more physical while federe's is more class, not currently but generally. In this game federer missed a very eassy forehand in the middle of the court that would have meant a very different story, mostly Nadal has been lucky in some matches against Federer that he would have surely won if it wasn't for Nadals's physical game and bad judgment from federer on important points, Nadal's type of game has given him greatness but I doubt he will reach federer's achievements 99.99 % sure.

lordmanji
04-22-2009, 11:15 PM
saw the last set. fed's forehand was a MONSTER. god so beautiful. where has it gone =(

BreakPoint
04-22-2009, 11:34 PM
The problem is that Nadal's level has improved dramatically since that time. From the very beginning, when Rafa crushed Roger in Miami 2004, Fed knew that the day would come when Nadal would overtake him completely. That why he'd always stress how important it was for him to get victories over Nadal while the Spaniard was young. Fed's a pretty shrewd judge of talent, and he instantly recognized that Nadal's talent was so far beyond his own that once Nadal come to even half of his peak there would be no more hope for Roger on any surface.

Federer should absolutely not watch Monte Carlo 2006 if he wants any kind of confidence heading into the clay season. Here he is playing at the absolute limit that his talent could ever possibly allow him to attain, and a green Nadal beats him. The match would only highlight Fed's mediocrity relative to one of the most precocious players in the history of the game.
I've never seen so much crap in a single post!

"Nadal crushed Federer in Miami 2004"? Federer had the flu, you Nadal-****!! :roll:

BreakPoint
04-22-2009, 11:38 PM
I don't how come people can say Nadal is better than Fed, he can probably be but first he has to achieve what Federer has and hasn't happened just yet, that is it, If you know tennis you can see that nadal is a fighter and his game is more physical while federe's is more class, not currently but generally. In this game federer missed a very eassy forehand in the middle of the court that would have meant a very different story, mostly Nadal has been lucky in some matches against Federer that he would have surely won if it wasn't for Nadals's physical game and bad judgment from federer on important points, Nadal's type of game has given him greatness but I doubt he will reach federer's achievements 99.99 % sure.
Very true.

Federer has more talent in his little pinky finger than Nadal has in his whole body. Nadal only wins by bludgeoning people and never giving up, not through sheer talent.

binomialtheory
04-22-2009, 11:45 PM
^ That isn't a talent in itself?

flyer
04-22-2009, 11:55 PM
Very true.

Federer has more talent in his little pinky finger than Nadal has in his whole body. Nadal only wins by bludgeoning people and never giving up, not through sheer talent.

so you would rather have more talent and lose than have less talent and win?

or does stating that federer has more talent that nadal just make you feel better given that nadal has made federer his b1ach?

TennisandMusic
04-23-2009, 12:12 AM
so you would rather have more talent and lose than have less talent and win?

or does stating that federer has more talent that nadal just make you feel better given that nadal has made federer his b1ach?

Breakpoint has already stated he would rather look good and lose than play "ugly" and win. Thankfully Nadal has a great game to watch, and still wins, despite what BP will bludgeon you over the head with.

Nadal has just as much talent as Federer anyway, and in some ways has more. It's just that guys like Breakpoint who live vicariously through their favorites can't stand to see Federer being beaten. And regularly at that.

paulorenzo
04-23-2009, 12:23 AM
Breakpoint has already stated he would rather look good and lose than play "ugly" and win. Thankfully Nadal has a great game to watch, and still wins, despite what BP will bludgeon you over the head with.

Nadal has just as much talent as Federer anyway, and in some ways has more. It's just that guys like Breakpoint who live vicariously through their favorites can't stand to see Federer being beaten. And regularly at that.
agreed.
if this was last year or two years ago though, i would laugh at you. :)
his game hasn't always been pleasant to watch, by any means.
but as of now his game is much more exciting to watch, especially in the clutch situations where he is forced to go for it.
the recent djokovic nadal final had many moments of sublime tennis.

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:27 AM
^ That isn't a talent in itself?
That's not tennis talent.

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:30 AM
so you would rather have more talent and lose than have less talent and win?

Any day of the week and twice on Sundays!

I'd rather play aggressive and own every shot in the book and lose than live the life of a pusher and win..

flyer
04-23-2009, 12:33 AM
Any day of the week and twice on Sundays!

I'd rather play aggressive and own every shot in the book and lose than live the life of a pusher and win..

you're a loser on the court than and in life, a pusher, haha

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:34 AM
Breakpoint has already stated he would rather look good and lose than play "ugly" and win. Thankfully Nadal has a great game to watch, and still wins, despite what BP will bludgeon you over the head with.

Nadal has just as much talent as Federer anyway, and in some ways has more. It's just that guys like Breakpoint who live vicariously through their favorites can't stand to see Federer being beaten. And regularly at that.
Nadal has a great game to watch? It's like watching someone scrap their fingernails across a blackboard.

I really don't care how much Federer loses nor how many times he loses to Nadal. Everyone who knows anything about tennis will still recognize Federer as having tons more talent than Nadal. The guy that wins the most in tennis leagues is never the one with the most talent. They just push until they win or the other guy gives up.

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:36 AM
you're a loser on the court than and in life, a pusher, haha
How can a serve and volleyer be a pusher?

I bet you'd push all day long just to win a stupid tennis match. Sad. How very sad. :(

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:37 AM
agreed.
if this was last year or two years ago though, i would laugh at you. :)
his game hasn't always been pleasant to watch, by any means.
but as of now his game is much more exciting to watch, especially in the clutch situations where he is forced to go for it.
the recent djokovic nadal final had many moments of sublime tennis.
You can say that again. So please do. :)

misterg
04-23-2009, 12:42 AM
Returning to the original post. On match poin Federer missed an really easy forehand from the T. From that moment Fed regularry missed decisives but easy forehands with Rafa. IMO his main problem playing Rafa is not his backhand but his forehand AND his head...

paulorenzo
04-23-2009, 12:45 AM
You can say that again. So please do. :)

haha. his game was indeed very boring back then. it was a pain to watch.

roger still has his sublime moments, but as of late, watching his matches is also becoming quite painful.

but in a different way, in a "what the fcuk are you doing federer!?" kind of way.

flyer
04-23-2009, 12:46 AM
How can a serve and volleyer be a pusher?

I bet you'd push all day long just to win a stupid tennis match. Sad. How very sad. :(

no i'd rather do other stuff with my life all day long while your posting on these boards, "Sad. How very sad."

paulorenzo
04-23-2009, 12:55 AM
no i'd rather do other stuff with my life all day long while your posting on these boards, "Sad. How very sad."

a serve and volleyer is a pusher?

flyer
04-23-2009, 12:56 AM
a serve and volleyer is a pusher?

i never called him a pusher, i was laughing at him calling nadal a pusher...would you like to agree win him in his assetion that nadal is a pusher?

paulorenzo
04-23-2009, 01:09 AM
i never called him a pusher, i was laughing at him calling nadal a pusher...would you like to agree win him in his assetion that nadal is a pusher?

assetion? i dont know.
but i wouldn't back anyone's assertion that current nadal is a pusher.
he has pusher tendencies through out the rally, but mixes well with his aggressive shots and clutch play.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-23-2009, 01:45 AM
you're a loser on the court than and in life, a pusher, haha It does sound like you are calling him a pusher... Kind of ironic you calling him a loser.

rhaber
04-23-2009, 07:29 AM
to quote herm edwards (coach of kansas city chiefs): "we play to win the game"

its that simple. enough said

Melissa
04-23-2009, 07:47 AM
no i'd rather do other stuff with my life all day long while your posting on these boards, "Sad. How very sad."


~~GiGGle~~You're just jealous cause you don't have 20,000
posts ~~GiGGle~~

ninman
04-23-2009, 08:51 AM
For me that match defined the Federer-Nadal rivalry. If Federer had won this I don't think Nadal would be 9-1 ahead on clay, or won RG 4 times in a row. There are many close matches that Federer has lost to Nadal and think he would have won his fair share of them, had he won this match.

I think the fact that he lost this match was the start of Nadal getting into Federer's head. I just wish I could have seen their matches again had Federer won that match. It was a match that he certainly should have won in my opinion, but just got too nervous at the moment of truth.

P_Agony
04-23-2009, 08:55 AM
I've never seen so much crap in a single post!

"Nadal crushed Federer in Miami 2004"? Federer had the flu, you Nadal-****!! :roll:

For rubber duckies this is a routine post. I think he saves it in his computer and just pastes it in every thread. He believes Federer is not even half as talented as Nadal. What a joke...

At least Nadal Freak and Mungo can be funny...but this guy is a top level *******.

P_Agony
04-23-2009, 08:57 AM
Breakpoint has already stated he would rather look good and lose than play "ugly" and win. Thankfully Nadal has a great game to watch, and still wins, despite what BP will bludgeon you over the head with.

Nadal has just as much talent as Federer anyway, and in some ways has more. It's just that guys like Breakpoint who live vicariously through their favorites can't stand to see Federer being beaten. And regularly at that.

Nadal has a lot of things going for him, but a beautiful game to watch isn't one of them, and it's just getting worse daily (watching it of course, not him playing it).

lordmanji
04-23-2009, 09:47 AM
For me that match defined the Federer-Nadal rivalry. If Federer had won this I don't think Nadal would be 9-1 ahead on clay, or won RG 4 times in a row. There are many close matches that Federer has lost to Nadal and think he would have won his fair share of them, had he won this match.

I think the fact that he lost this match was the start of Nadal getting into Federer's head. I just wish I could have seen their matches again had Federer won that match. It was a match that he certainly should have won in my opinion, but just got too nervous at the moment of truth.

i totally agree. he had two match points after coming back from 1-4 in the 5th, then in the tiebreak he was up 5-4 (though it was on rafa's serve). his forehand let him down on each of those crucial moments - one he hit about four feet long, the other on the run he really missed the court.

if fed had beaten him anytime else other than in hamburg where rafa was tired in the final after winning every tournament leading up to it, i think fed would be in a great position now. but its almost like he knows if he beats rafa on clay he will be considered the GOAT and that weighs on his mind too much when he plays. now it's affected him on every other surface too.

flyer
04-23-2009, 10:09 AM
It does sound like you are calling him a pusher... Kind of ironic you calling him a loser.

yeah read the previous post goof ball, care to explain the irony...

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 10:37 AM
yeah read the previous post goof ball, care to explain the irony...
Kind of ironic you calling him a goof ball.

flyer
04-23-2009, 12:08 PM
Kind of ironic you calling him a goof ball.

hey dont look now but your life just passed you by...

BreakPoint
04-23-2009, 12:09 PM
hey dont look now but your life just passed you by...
I'm looking and I like what I'm seeing. :)

Paradise is bliss. :)

flyer
04-23-2009, 12:33 PM
I'm looking and I like what I'm seeing. :)

Paradise is bliss. :)

hahaha, if you say so my man

ninman
04-23-2009, 04:00 PM
i totally agree. he had two match points after coming back from 1-4 in the 5th, then in the tiebreak he was up 5-4 (though it was on rafa's serve). his forehand let him down on each of those crucial moments - one he hit about four feet long, the other on the run he really missed the court.

if fed had beaten him anytime else other than in hamburg where rafa was tired in the final after winning every tournament leading up to it, i think fed would be in a great position now. but its almost like he knows if he beats rafa on clay he will be considered the GOAT and that weighs on his mind too much when he plays. now it's affected him on every other surface too.

Sorry to correct you but Federer was actually 4-2 40-30 up and serving in the fifth. He had won 10 of the last 14 games up to that point. He was winning and playing great. Losing that match hurt him a lot more than he's been willing to let on.

veroniquem
04-23-2009, 04:13 PM
Fed should watch his match vs. Nadal at the tennis master's cup 2006, when he would pull off crazy but controlled winners off both wings no matter what the score was, and despite giving 4 consectuive points away with easy misses, still manages to come back and break Nadal with confidence the next game.
I think right now, between tournaments, Fed just tries to forget that Nadal even exists! Being reminded of him probably gives him nightmares at night!

tennis-hero
04-23-2009, 04:17 PM
greatest match of all time

Roger at his absolute peak

versus Nadal's greatest clay court year thus far

Nadal was scared for dear life of Rogers FH

see back in those days it had the power to destroy planets

hence, the truth of why Nadal picks his butt is because his pants used to turn brown after every point versus Federer- and the mighty forehand of doom

Roger was soooooooooooooo good back then

its hard to compare with Federer today

veroniquem
04-23-2009, 04:24 PM
Nadal has a great game to watch? It's like watching someone scrap their fingernails across a blackboard.

I really don't care how much Federer loses nor how many times he loses to Nadal. Everyone who knows anything about tennis will still recognize Federer as having tons more talent than Nadal. The guy that wins the most in tennis leagues is never the one with the most talent. They just push until they win or the other guy gives up.
Federer's game right now with its UEs and shanks and ups and downs is neither pleasant nor beautiful to watch. His 3rd set vs Djoko in Miami and to a lesser degree vs Murray in IW were nothing short of pathetic and uninspiring. On the other hand, several matches with Nadal in them have produced pretty exciting tennis recently (and yes beautiful as well). Too bad you miss out on them because you're too fanatic and too polarized to enjoy the best tennis has to offer regardless of which guy is producing it at any given moment.

Bassus
04-23-2009, 04:43 PM
The problem is that Nadal's level has improved dramatically since that time. From the very beginning, when Rafa crushed Roger in Miami 2004, Fed knew that the day would come when Nadal would overtake him completely. That why he'd always stress how important it was for him to get victories over Nadal while the Spaniard was young. Fed's a pretty shrewd judge of talent, and he instantly recognized that Nadal's talent was so far beyond his own that once Nadal come to even half of his peak there would be no more hope for Roger on any surface.

Federer should absolutely not watch Monte Carlo 2006 if he wants any kind of confidence heading into the clay season. Here he is playing at the absolute limit that his talent could ever possibly allow him to attain, and a green Nadal beats him. The match would only highlight Fed's mediocrity relative to one of the most precocious players in the history of the game.


It's hard to believe that anyone who watches tennis with the slightest bit of objectivity could really believe such nonsense.