PDA

View Full Version : I love how whenever a new up and coming player beats Federer other than Nadal...


Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 04:49 PM
....fans refer to how "bad" Federer played instead of how "well" that other player played.

Its as if they need to find an excuse as to why the great man lost. Why can't people ever give credit where credit is due?

Just reading the past 2-4 pages on this forum tells you everything.

"Federer sucked"

"Federer's lost the passion"

"Federer averages a poor 5 set grandslam record"

"Federer may as well have played with his laced tied"

....and if Federer loses to a player outside of a grandslam its always; ahh its a Masters Series, Federer doesn't care for those, he's pacing himself like a long distance runner.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 04:51 PM
Sorry 1-6 pages

JennyS
09-16-2009, 04:55 PM
It is pretty annoying. Did people also say that when Safin beat Federer in Australia?

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 04:56 PM
Pretty much.

UsualSuspect
09-16-2009, 05:04 PM
I agree. But what is equally damn annoying is people acting like Federer played great tennis and still lost. 13 aces, 11 Double Faults, terrible serving and not to mention the fact that he was running away with the match until he started playing like a tool and let del potro back into the match :roll:. The match serves as a huge reminder that you should never take your foot of the gas even with a sizable lead.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 05:07 PM
Sorry, how was he playing like a tool?

UsualSuspect
09-16-2009, 05:10 PM
Sorry, how was he playing like a tool?
^^ TM, During the match when Federer was a break in the second set, Federer played some of the sloppiest tennis I have ever seen. He sliced the ball into the middle of the service box and ran up to the net only to get passed several times. He unnecessarily went for being a shotmaker rather than showing consistency and Del Potro made him eat it.

Court Valkyrie
09-16-2009, 05:10 PM
My beef is the "Is Del Potro the Greatest of All Time?" threads.
Come on folks he won one freaking grand slam event and beat in 5 sets a 7/10 Federer. If Federer would have served better and wouldn't have hit to the Delpo Forehand, we would be talking about Federer's 16th GS title.

ArrowSmith
09-16-2009, 05:11 PM
If only Fed was 24 years old, he would have thumped Del Potro!

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 05:14 PM
^^ TM, During the match when Federer was a break in the second set, Federer played some of the sloppiest tennis I have ever seen. He sliced the ball into the middle of the service box and ran up to the net only to get passed several times. He unnecessarily went for being a shotmaker rather than showing consistency and Del Potro made him eat it.

I see....

So your basically in other words suggesting Federer was attempting to showboat and impress @ a time and against an opponent he was only just out playing; rather he should've just quite simply gotten the job done in a professional manner.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 05:14 PM
If only Fed was 24 years old, he would have thumped Del Potro!

I don't believe Federer is THAT much worse today @ 28.

UsualSuspect
09-16-2009, 05:16 PM
I see....

So your basically in other words suggesting Federer was attempting to showboat and impress @ a time and against an opponent he was only just out playing; rather he should've just quite simply gotten the job done in a professional manner.
Even with that, I am not saying Federer would have won. My belief is that Federer let Del Potro into the match and once Del Potro found his form, he became unstoppable. Del Potro, by the end of the 4th set, had so much confidence that he was virtually indestructible.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 05:18 PM
Even with that, I am not saying Federer would have won. My belief is that Federer let Del Potro into the match and once Del Potro found his form, he became unstoppable. Del Potro, by the end of the 4th set, had so much confidence that he was virtually indestructible.

I see what your saying.

UsualSuspect
09-16-2009, 05:19 PM
If only Fed was 24 years old, he would have thumped Del Potro!
USO 2004 was a performance like no other. Federer's forehand was so much more lethal in those days. Federer was a faster, stronger, and more stable player back then. Not that this is relevant to the discussion.

Ripster
09-16-2009, 05:32 PM
It's mostly just *******s who are writing those responses. It's like Federer can't be beat when he's playing well but when he loses it's because he had an off-day. It's unfathomable to these people that Fed might actually have gotten outplayed.

Claudius
09-16-2009, 05:32 PM
Federer played relatively poorly. Del Potro played very well....end of story.

Court Valkyrie
09-16-2009, 05:40 PM
It's mostly just *******s who are writing those responses. It's like Federer can't be beat when he's playing well but when he loses it's because he had an off-day. It's unfathomable to these people that Fed might actually have gotten outplayed.

Yes...49% First serves and 11 double faults is a great day for Fed. He was outplayed because Federer couldn't serve, and played to the Delpo forehand wayyy too much.

grafselesfan
09-16-2009, 05:41 PM
I am no Federer fan but I see why people would think he played poorly. His serve sucked majorly for his standards, and that was right from the start even when he was dominating the match so it wasnt due to Del Potro. He lacked focus and blew alot of the break points and other chances and got lazy mentally at key points in the 2nd and 4th sets. His timing was off, and his strategy was increasingly poor. I hate Federer and am thrilled Del Potro won and do feel Del Potro played amazingly well to beat him, especialy after the 1st set and a half. However I also can see why people would think Federer didnt play well. I dont care, I am just happy someone other than Federer won and I sort of like Del Potro too (though he isnt one of my top few favorites), but I am not going to criticize anyone who feel Federer didnt play that well this match either.

If it seems as you said that is probably not just coincidence. The reality is Federer is probably so good and the current field lacking enough in truly great players (not just very good players) that it turns out Nadal is actually the only one who can beat him when he is playing really well most of the time.

Ripster
09-16-2009, 05:55 PM
Yes...49% First serves and 11 double faults is a great day for Fed. He was outplayed because Federer couldn't serve, and played to the Delpo forehand wayyy too much.

I'm not just talking about the Del Potro match, I'm talking about pretty much every loss he's had this year.

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 05:58 PM
Sorry, how was he playing like a tool?
How long have you been playing, watching, and analyzing tennis?

DarthFed
09-16-2009, 06:02 PM
I'm not just talking about the Del Potro match, I'm talking about pretty much every loss he's had this year.

Ughh i don't want to come off as a **** but a lot of his losses this year HAVE been due to horrible play....examples

Montreal Tsonga - Up 5-1 served for it like twice and couldn't get a first serve to save his life

Miami-self explanatory, even before Nole he lost a set to roddick because he got broken after being up 40-0 and should have lost to roddick anyway.

Indian Wells - Had the momentum in the 3rd...Murray trips and for some reason Federers level just dipped.

His opponents deserve credit..but if you really think Fed was at his best in some of these matches (miami in particular) then you're blind.

I fully give Del Po credit but Rog played like crap for good amount of the match but thats not DP or any other players fault is it?

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:05 PM
How long have you been playing, watching, and analyzing tennis?

To be fair, i was on holiday and only watched the semi brief highlights.

Been playing since i was 8, reached a relatively reasonable high standard and have followed the pro circuit intensively since about 14. I am 22 now.

Ripster
09-16-2009, 06:08 PM
Ughh i don't want to come off as a **** but a lot of his losses this year HAVE been due to horrible play....examples

Montreal Tsonga - Up 5-1 served for it like twice and couldn't get a first serve to save his life

Miami-self explanatory, even before Nole he lost a set to roddick because he got broken after being up 40-0 and should have lost to roddick anyway.

Indian Wells - Had the momentum in the 3rd...Murray trips and for some reason Federers level just dipped.

His opponents deserve credit..but if you really think Fed was at his best in some of these matches (miami in particular) then you're blind.

I fully give Del Po credit but Rog played like crap for good amount of the match but thats not DP or any other players fault is it?

**** ALERT!

No I'm just kidding :)

It's true he didn't play his best in those matches but I do think more credit has to be handed to his opponents. All those players you mentioned are solid top ten players so there's a reason he lost to them and not some journeymen players. Just wondering if people can come up with a match where Federer lost while playing his best (or high-level) tennis.... 2005 AO loss to Safin?

Fedace
09-16-2009, 06:10 PM
I am watching the Replay on Tennis channel and it is SWEET to see Delpo beating up on Roger....

West Coast Ace
09-16-2009, 06:13 PM
Federer played relatively poorly. Del Potro played very well....end of story.That pretty much sums it up.

Sounds like the OP is a bitter fan of some other player... or doesn't know tennis - if you watched Fed's SF and F matches and didn't see a difference (after the 1st 5 or 6 sets) then I think I know the answer...

JMDP played well (his FH was incredible) in the last 3-4 sets and took advantage of the opportunity that was presented - and deserves credit for that. But that opportunity was created by Fed's drop in play. As others have said, look at the #'s - I'm sure Roddick wished Fed had served like that back at Wimby...

DarthFed
09-16-2009, 06:14 PM
Fedace? ughh...why have you never been banned? i suppose you can't be banned for being annoying..

Just wondering if people can come up with a match were Federer lost while playing his best (or high-level) tennis.... 2005 AO loss to Safin?

AO 05 definitely, and some of the FO losses...since Nadals better is better than Feds better on clay :), I'm pretty sure Nalbandian has kicked his *** regardless of level lol.

To be honest my post only refers to this year though..in which poor play, if i had to put a number, was 40% responcible for the loss.

Bud
09-16-2009, 06:21 PM
I am watching the Replay on Tennis channel and it is SWEET to see Delpo beating up on Roger....

:lol::lol::lol:

I agree :oops:

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 06:31 PM
It's mostly just *******s who are writing those responses. It's like Federer can't be beat when he's playing well but when he loses it's because he had an off-day. It's unfathomable to these people that Fed might actually have gotten outplayed.
Yes, Federer got outplayed because he was playing terrible. It's not too hard to outplay someone who can't get a 1st serve into the box and keeps hitting to your biggest weapon on purpose.

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 06:34 PM
To be fair, i was on holiday and only watched the semi brief highlights.

OK, so now the truth comes out. Why did you start this thread if you didn't even see the entire match? I've seen the entire match like over 4 times already because they keep repeating it on Tennis Channel and ESPN2.

Please refrain from analyzing what happened in the match and how it unfolded without seeing the entire match first - from the first point to the last point.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:34 PM
That pretty much sums it up.

Sounds like the OP is a bitter fan of some other player... or doesn't know tennis - if you watched Fed's SF and F matches and didn't see a difference (after the 1st 5 or 6 sets) then I think I know the answer...

JMDP played well (his FH was incredible) in the last 3-4 sets and took advantage of the opportunity that was presented - and deserves credit for that. But that opportunity was created by Fed's drop in play. As others have said, look at the #'s - I'm sure Roddick wished Fed had served like that back at Wimby...

Sounds like your an ignorant fool that has the shallow minded cheek to make judgemental remarks about other posters simply because they aern't in agreement with yourself.

Its every posters stupidity to guess about someone being bitter or twisted about another player; sometimes there isn't a motive, you see? I'm simply ****ed off with the barage of ****** troll threads on this board made by narrow minded idiots who believe Federer is so good he can only beat himself.

Part of being a great player, is playing your best or close to your best consistently; if Federer isn't playing his best on a particular day, that means he was beaten by the better player on the day and occasion. It doesn't mean Del Potro won the tournament through forms of default.

Del Potro served huge the entire match and even Aggasi would've struggled to return those serves back.

DarthFed
09-16-2009, 06:37 PM
Del Potro served huge the entire match and even Aggasi would've struggled to return those serves back.

If you believe this then you couldn't have possibly seen the entire match.

No one is saying Del Potro won by default..have not seen the legion of fed fans praising him? including myself...god damn i ****ing hate this forum sometimes...

Fact-Del Potro outplayed Federer, in the latter stages he was outgunning him.
Fact-Federer was NOT AT HIS BEST, this is indisputable he served VERY poorly..11 double faults? from Federer? is that normal to you? And he wasted a ton of chances..had he served out the second set i think we would have had a different USO champion

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:38 PM
OK, so now the truth comes out. Why did you start this thread if you didn't even see the entire match? I've seen the entire match like over 4 times already because they keep repeating it on Tennis Channel and ESPN2.

Please refrain from analyzing what happened in the match and how it unfolded without seeing the entire match first - from the first point to the last point.

...well the highlights gave me a pretty accurate enough insight as it pretty much backed up what most people had been saying about how the "ENTIRE" match had been strung.

Also note, i never "analyzed" what happened; analyzing would've involved me going in to more detail, i simply made summaries and i think its fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain that the moment Federer loses to ANYONE, thats anyone regardless of who or how and in what circumstances there are always excuses involved.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:40 PM
If you believe this then you couldn't have possibly seen the entire match.

Watched highlights of each set and what i came to witness was a big serving, i dunno what sort of standards you expect when talking about "huge" but it was on the mark as far as i am concerned.

West Coast Ace
09-16-2009, 06:40 PM
Sounds like your an ignorant fool...I'm simply ****ed off with the barage of ****** troll threads on this board made by narrow minded idiots...Resorting to name calling exposes your lack of tennis knowledge.

Fed broke JMDP multiple times in the 1st set and in the 1st game of the 2nd. So your 'he served HUGE all match' is an Epic Fail.

And you didn't even debate my point about Fed's serve in the JMDP match relative to the Wimby final. Again, you obviously know when the facts don't relate with your view and choose to ignore them.

I gave JMDP some credit so I'm not quite sure why you're lashing out at me - unless your just a child... then it makes perfect sense.

PS - so by your silly logic it was all Tsonga's doing when Fed was up 5-1 in the 3rd in Montreal and lost. Too funny.

West Coast Ace
09-16-2009, 06:43 PM
Fedace? ughh...why have you never been banned? i suppose you can't be banned for being annoying..
Because everyone ignores his posts?

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 06:44 PM
...well the highlights gave me a pretty accurate enough insight as it pretty much backed up what most people had been saying about how the "ENTIRE" match had been strung.

Also note, i never "analyzed" what happened; analyzing would've involved me going in to more detail, i simply made summaries and i think its fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain that the moment Federer loses to ANYONE, thats anyone regardless of who the situation, there is always excuses involved.
Sorry, but highlights never tell the whole story. Just like a movie trailer does not tell the whole story of the movie and everything that happens in a movie.

If you saw the entire match from beginning to end, you would be amazed that Federer didn't win the match in straight sets and you would have seen how poorly he played and how bad his strategy was, especially on important points. I mean he was 5 for 22 on break points! He knows how to beat Del Potro. He's done it 6 times in a row. He beat him 6-3, 6-0, 6-0 just a few months ago on a hardcourt. For some reason, he decided to change his winning strategy completely and go to a losing strategy. He decided to try and slug it out with Del Potro from the baseline and hit almost everything to Del Potro's biggest weapon, his forehand. Well, you can ask Nadal how well that strategy works.

West Coast Ace
09-16-2009, 06:51 PM
If you saw the entire match from beginning to end, you would be amazed that Federer didn't win the match in straight sets and you would have seen how poorly he played and how bad his strategy was, especially on important points. I mean he was 5 for 22 on break points! He knows how to beat Del Potro. He's done it 6 times in a row. He beat him 6-3, 6-0, 6-0 just a few months ago on a hardcourt. For some reason, he decided to change his winning strategy completely and go to a losing strategy. He decided to try and slug it out with Del Potro from the baseline and hit almost everything to Del Potro's biggest weapon, his forehand. Well, you can ask Nadal how well that strategy works.Great analysis. I'd add "Fed let off the gas in the 1st set - should have won it 6-1 - ended up a more respectable 6-3" - which gave Del Potro, who was already starting to get that 'I'm happy to be here and get the 2nd place check and fly back to Buenos Aires' look. And 100% right - Fed has a VERY bad habit of reverting to strictly baseline play when things get tough - and when he does venture to the net it's usually a poorly mapped out Kamakazi Run that ends up with a short approach and getting passed.

But I think we've both fed this little troll enough - I'm out of this thread.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:52 PM
Resorting to name calling exposes your lack of tennis knowledge.

Fed broke JMDP multiple times in the 1st set and in the 1st game of the 2nd. So your 'he served HUGE all match' is an Epic Fail.

And you didn't even debate my point about Fed's serve in the JMDP match relative to the Wimby final. Again, you obviously know when the facts don't relate with your view and choose to ignore them.

I gave JMDP some credit so I'm not quite sure why you're lashing out at me - unless your just a child... then it makes perfect sense.

PS - so by your silly logic it was all Tsonga's doing when Fed was up 5-1 in the 3rd in Montreal and lost. Too funny.

Refering to someone as ignorant is name calling? Okay.

Breaking him multiple times in one set wouldn't automatically suggest he didn't serve well. Did Del Potro have to not lose serve for it to be worth credit?

The facts relate with my view very well indeed. Here's the fact, Federer didn't perform to his outstandingly best and was beaten by an in form and inspired Del Potro. My view is people are detracting from Del Potro's performance and focusing most of their attentions on what Federer did wrong.

If Federer played near his best; he'd almost never lose, thats unquestionable.

A child? Coming from a poster that resorts with using the overused, forum kiddy catch phrase saying that is "Epic Fail"? You've got to be kidding me? lol

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 06:57 PM
Great analysis. I'd add "Fed let off the gas in the 1st set - should have won it 6-1 - ended up a more respectable 6-3" - which gave Del Potro, who was already starting to get that 'I'm happy to be here and get the 2nd place check and fly back to Buenos Aires' look. And 100% right - Fed has a VERY bad habit of reverting to strictly baseline play when things get tough - and when he does venture to the net it's usually a poorly mapped out Kamakazi Run that ends up with a short approach and getting passed.

But I think we've both fed this little troll enough - I'm out of this thread

What a self righteous fool.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 07:00 PM
West Coast Ace; you missed the point of this thread completely, Federer admittedly didn't perform to how he could and should mainly as a result of a stupid transformation in tactics during the match and Del Potro took full advantage. To me thats being outplayed. Now what others are suggesting is far different from what you and BreakPoint are, some seem to believe Federer's lost his passion and desire to win @ all costs.

DarthFed
09-16-2009, 07:04 PM
Watched highlights of each set and what i came to witness was a big serving, i dunno what sort of standards you expect when talking about "huge" but it was on the mark as far as i am concerned.

Thats the problem...for most of the 3rd DP was spinning First serves in after the DF cost him the 3rd set...you can't use highlights for match analysis >_>

federerfanatic
09-16-2009, 07:04 PM
I'm not just talking about the Del Potro match, I'm talking about pretty much every loss he's had this year.

The very best players typically almost never lose a match where they play particularly well, let alone their very best. That is why they are the best players. Look at Serena Williams for another example. She is less dominant and won less than Federer, yet she probably loses even less often when she plays well. In fact Serena has probably never lost a match her whole career where she played her best, and she hasnt lost a match where she played fairly well since last years Wimbledon final with Venus. As for Federer the only matches he lost this year playing fairly well were the Australian Open final with Nadal and the loss to Wawrinka in Monte Carlo. I honestly cant think of any others at the moment.

Tennis_Maestro
09-16-2009, 07:08 PM
The very best players typically almost never lose a match where they play particularly well, let alone their very best. That is why they are the best players. Look at Serena Williams for another example. She is less dominant and won less than Federer, yet she probably loses even less often when she plays well. In fact Serena has probably never lost a match her whole career where she played her best, and she hasnt lost a match where she played fairly well since last years Wimbledon final with Venus. As for Federer the only matches he lost this year playing fairly well were the Australian Open final with Nadal and the loss to Wawrinka in Monte Carlo. I honestly cant think of any others at the moment.

Something most people won't ever learn.

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 07:30 PM
Breaking him multiple times in one set wouldn't automatically suggest he didn't serve well. Did Del Potro have to not lose serve for it to be worth credit?

On Del Potro's first 10 serves, he only got 1 first serve in.

Federer had more than 10 break points in that 1st set alone. It could have easily been a 6-1 or 6-0 set for Federer.

As poorly as Del Potro was playing, Federer found a way to play even worse to lose the match.

Del Potro played significantly better in the semis against Nadal.

tlm
09-16-2009, 07:47 PM
It is not like delpo played some unbelievable tennis the whole match.I love how all we hear about is feds mistakes, but not much about delpos.

The first set he played like crap, the 3rd he double faults twice in a row to give the set up. Then the rest of the match he took it easy on the serve+ was mostly spinning them in. Delpo did not play anywhere near as good as he can either.

In the 5th set he played solid but nothing spectacular by any means. This is where fed played crappy, but we have seen him fall apart a lot lately in the final set of a match.

ArrowSmith
09-16-2009, 08:17 PM
Wow... a 28 year old got beat by a 20 year old with super-fresh legs and 600 less matches under his belt. That's such a shocker in tennis!

Nadalfan89
09-16-2009, 08:19 PM
*******s doing what they do best. Take solace in the fact that most of them have early bed times. The forum get's better after 10 pm.

UsualSuspect
09-16-2009, 08:26 PM
*******s doing what they do best. Take solace in the fact that most of them have early bed times. The forum get's better after 10 pm.
I am sorry that watching Nadal get wrecked in straights has given you severe insomnia. Please do forgive us for having normal circadian rhythms.

フェデラー
09-16-2009, 08:27 PM
this was far from a clean match by either player. but its hard to argue that federer didnt close it out in three sets which he easily could have. The match was moving in slo mo because of how ****** del po played.

ArrowSmith
09-16-2009, 08:29 PM
this was far from a clean match by either player. but its hard to argue that federer didnt close it out in three sets which he easily could have. The match was moving in slo mo because of how ****** del po played.

It sure wasn't in slo-mo when D-Pot was hitting 109mph forehands.

BreakPoint
09-16-2009, 08:37 PM
It sure wasn't in slo-mo when D-Pot was hitting 109mph forehands.
That was only later in the match after Federer changed his strategy for no reason to try and slug it out with Del Potro from the baseline.

nSLICE
09-16-2009, 09:53 PM
honeslty i dont post here much i just look at what all of fed nadal murray del potro ***** are saying and laugh.. but i just couldnt resist puting in some input

first of all i am a fed fan but im more of a good tennis fan rather than being a fed fan.. it doesnt bother me if he loses to anyone while both play good tennis.. that being said....

obviously as fed becomes older winning slams is only gonna get harder thats just common sense..is he done winning grand slams? probably not if i had to choose 1 to stay alive i would choose that hes going to win a couple more.. at least 1 more...do i think fed is better than sampras...yes i would say more parts of his game are complete than petes..however pete had a wayy better serve it never broke down like feds does.. if we take a look at this years losses at majors.. he lost both 6-2 in the 5th.. so basically he was 2 sets away from having the best year of his life at an age of 28 full congrats to him..however in both of those matches it seemed like he was half a step slow in the 5th.. and his serve definately did not help him if anything he serve way below par to his level..

federer has clearly shown that he has the best consitency of all time.. 22 semis slams and counting.. 17 of 18 finals in slams in a row or whatever the number is.. nobody is even close to that..now everyone needs to stop this IF this IF that.. if he didnt play bad he wouldve won.. if i trained better when i was younger i might;ve been playing us open now and not being on these boards.. thats all speculation...he clearly did not play well this us open final everyone knows that..there could be 2 reasons why 1) he just had a bad day.. or 2) del potro made him play bad...imo i think he started playing ok did not take his chances when he had to and then del potro out played him in the rest of the match if you play better towards the end you definately deserve to win .. this isnt a timed sport so clearly the beter person playing during the latter stage of the match should win .. and congrats to del potro for doing just that..

now as we have seen fed have more struggles the past 2 years winning easily we are now finally having a fun time watching tennis knowing that there is a possibility that fed might lose..this where we are gonna find out what fed is really made of.. he went away in australian and us opens.. however he was coming through at the french and wimbly.. to me thats just fun watching that.. hes having tougher matches with all the people that he was beating easier before.. the younger field is catching up and the older field is getting older..

now is del potro the real deal? by watching lose to nadal a few years back at the french open to this years us open.. i would say he is.. he has shown a full out improvement over his game.. his technique on his serve and forehand are soo much better than they were even last year.. and so far all hes doing is improving..if the fame and money doesnt get to him he has pottential to be a multiple slam winner..however thats a big IF.. as we have seen from a lot of younger players they dont have it in them what fed does..comparing his improvement to djokovics and murrays is huge.. to me it seems that djokovic is kind of happy to where he is .. if he wants to improve and win more he needs to fix that serve and his forehand.. on his serrve the racquet is facing at the sky which makes it soo much harder to close it under pressure.. thats why we see days where he just zones with his pure natural gifted athletic ability and then we see him miss serves by miles.. same with his forehand.. murray is just all talk so far..no real weapons.. his mom is a nutcase that thinks that pushing the ball is gonna win u slams..

so to me im really not surprised that del potro won before murray and beofre novak got his second slam.. he has shown his full out dedication to improve thats how you become dangerous and can rely on your shots even when playing your B or even C games...as we see if djokovic wins against someone good.. he pretty much has to play his A game.. however del potro showed completely the opposite.. he did not play well the us opens finals as well.. as still won.. he hung in there till he started making balls in ..

so watch out for the rest of 2009 but 2010 should be another good year.. we will see how much tennis really means to fed now and if he stays motivated to play.. how nadals injuries will turn out in a few months and weather he can get back to his A game...we weill see what novak and murray will do in their off seasons..