PDA

View Full Version : Blessing in Disguise?


babbette
06-19-2009, 11:22 AM
Maybe Rafa had more motivation and luck as number 2 and maybe that luck and motivation will return with him during the summer?

Roger was given a pass to the Grandslam, maybe Rafa will be treated to the same in his return? Time will tell. Now that i've had time to digest, i'm fine with his withdrawal. It's not the end of the world. His career is not over. Others may shine, that's fine, some of them are getting old they need it. Whoever wins Wimbledon...well done! :p

I'll probably be devastated seeing his presser but well...such is life.

the Town Sherif
06-19-2009, 11:26 AM
man,
some of these posters actually feel like they contributed to fed's success....LOL

Lotto
06-19-2009, 11:26 AM
Maybe he should return to shirtless tops aswell....and longer shorts..and tighter underwear....he was dominating everyone, including federer with them....and about 15% of him winning the Aussie Open was Fed choking at key moments so...now that fed is over the mental block, it seems(we'll have to wait because madrid wasnt a great indication) he'll need all the luck he can get :D [half joke ;) ]

MichaelChang
06-19-2009, 11:26 AM
yeah man, don't cry for his withdrawl. He has future, he's only 23. And I am not even a Nadal fan but I do believe he will back.

fed_rulz
06-19-2009, 11:29 AM
Maybe Rafa had more motivation and luck as number 2 and maybe that luck and motivation will return with him during the summer?

Roger was given a pass to the Grandslam, maybe Rafa will be treated to the same in his return? Time will tell. Now that i've had time to digest, i'm fine with his withdrawal. It's not the end of the world. His career is not over. Others may shine, that's fine, some of them are getting old they need it. Whoever wins Wimbledon...well done! :p

I'll probably be devastated seeing his presser but well...such is life.

Beg to differ on both counts. I think the "old one" still has in him to compete, and no, he didn't get a pass on the grandslam. He earned it..

Having said that, Rafa's withdrawal sucks :(. I feel sorry for him. In many ways the hollowness left by Nadal's pulling out is a taste of what to expect in the future when Fed retires, and there is no more of a Fed Vs Nadal rivalry.. i shudder to think......

drakulie
06-19-2009, 11:35 AM
Better to be old and still winning slams, including being the New King of Clay, than a broken down 23 year young player who can't complete a whole tennis season.

bizarre_opinion
06-19-2009, 11:46 AM
the question is, can he come back and play the same tennis as he's been doing for the last year or 2? i very much doubt it. Nadal has had a history of knee problem's and it seems, it's now cought up to him a bit too much. When playing tennis or any active sport for the matter, the joints are the most sensitve part of the body and depending on the amount of stress put on specific joints, there is more chance of injury. Also, when you suffer from the same injury over and over again, the weaker your joints or that part of the body become.

Movement is a big part of nadal's game. If his movement is diminished in anyway, he just becomes an average player.

theduh
06-19-2009, 11:49 AM
Maybe Rafa had more motivation and luck as number 2 and maybe that luck and motivation will return with him during the summer?

Roger was given a pass to the Grandslam, maybe Rafa will be treated to the same in his return? Time will tell. Now that i've had time to digest, i'm fine with his withdrawal. It's not the end of the world. His career is not over. Others may shine, that's fine, some of them are getting old they need it. Whoever wins Wimbledon...well done! :p

I'll probably be devastated seeing his presser but well...such is life.

I like the post but you don't have to include the bolded part. Last time I check Roger has 5 consecutive Wimbledon crown to Nadal's one. So this is not a pass IMHO.

charliefedererer
06-19-2009, 11:50 AM
Evert and Navratilova played against each other 80 times. That's a rivalry!
I hope Rafa recovers quickly and he and Fed battle it out in a lot more head to heads over the next few years. The sooner Nadal recovers and gets on with his great tennis career, the better. What a bummer he's not playing Wimbledon. I was so looking forward to a match that would even come close to last year's final. Plus watching a likely Djoker-Nadal match as well. Now there's less likely going to be a great Fed-Murray matchup, if Djokovic tires our Murray in the semis. Ahhhh! This screws up everything. Get well Rafa! I want to see more great tennis.

joeri888
06-19-2009, 12:45 PM
I like the post but you don't have to include the bolded part. Last time I check Roger has 5 consecutive Wimbledon crown to Nadal's one. So this is not a pass IMHO.

+1, no need to attack Roger over Rafa's injuries. No.2 might motivate Rafa, though IMO being no. 1 did something extra special with Roger as well.

gsharma
06-19-2009, 12:55 PM
Nadal's absence hurts the game of tennis, more than anything else (other than his knees, of course). It's great for Federer though as his chief rival's absence makes it much easier for him.

Federer is a great player, one of the all time best, but he's not the greatest. When he has a loosing record against multiple players in his prime (Nadal, Murray etc.), he simply can't be considered the greatest. Anyway, I hope Nadal recovers soon and Fed stays healthy so we can get to see some amazing tennis. I hope Nadal is back for the Open.

And hopefully, this serves as a lesson to the stupid ATP for having a stupid calendar of tournaments. We need to give these guys more time. Everyone, write to the ATP to improve the scheduling :-)

fed_rulz
06-19-2009, 01:12 PM
Nadal's absence hurts the game of tennis, more than anything else (other than his knees, of course). It's great for Federer though as his chief rival's absence makes it much easier for him.

Federer is a great player, one of the all time best, but he's not the greatest. When he has a loosing record against multiple players in his prime (Nadal, Murray etc.), he simply can't be considered the greatest. Anyway, I hope Nadal recovers soon and Fed stays healthy so we can get to see some amazing tennis. I hope Nadal is back for the Open.

And hopefully, this serves as a lesson to the stupid ATP for having a stupid calendar of tournaments. We need to give these guys more time. Everyone, write to the ATP to improve the scheduling :-)

While I agree with the rest of your post, the bolded part is absurd. He may not be the greatest, but not for the reasons you mentioned.

gsharma
06-19-2009, 01:22 PM
While I agree with the rest of your post, the bolded part is absurd. He may not be the greatest, but not for the reasons you mentioned.

He may not be the greatest to you for some reason but I don't have to agree with your reason. In my opinion, given that Fed has had almost no answers to Nadal everytime they have played is a big no-no. Not only that, he refuses to adapt and find answers. On the contrary, he would rather be pig-headed and choose to win playing "his" game. I believe Sampras had a winning record against Agassi and so did others like Borg and Laver.

Anyway, this is my criteria and you don't have to agree.

fed_rulz
06-19-2009, 01:46 PM
He may not be the greatest to you for some reason but I don't have to agree with your reason. In my opinion, given that Fed has had almost no answers to Nadal everytime they have played is a big no-no. Not only that, he refuses to adapt and find answers. On the contrary, he would rather be pig-headed and choose to win playing "his" game. I believe Sampras had a winning record against Agassi and so did others like Borg and Laver.

Anyway, this is my criteria and you don't have to agree.

Little harsh on Fed, aren't we? Outside of clay, their matches have always been close. So it's not like he does not have "answers" to Nadal. On clay, Nadal is clearly the best of all time, and is clearly better than Roger.

Anyways, the absurdity of your criteria is that you'll be hard-pressed to find even ONE of Sampras, Borg and Laver who has a winning record against all of the players they played, even in their primes.

I don't agree with your criteria, and I don't expect you to agree with mine too. I just wanted to point out the fallacy in using h2h as a metric to exclude him. That's all.

I'm done posting on this topic; I apologize to the OP - didn't mean to digress off topic