PDA

View Full Version : The US open thing


Leonidas
05-19-2010, 12:32 AM
Everytime thereīs a thread about Nadal or Federer, some *******s have to bring up somemething about the US open. Itīs like the holy grail, i mean, itīs the main argument to put Nadal down. AO is also HC, maybe slower, but who gives a damn? US open is also the only GS that forces players to play semis on saturday and final on sunday. 2 five setters in a row?? Some years ago, Fedtars used to say that Nadal was only a clay-courts wonder. Then Nadal reached 2 WB finals and beat federer in 2008. Then , they said that he was also good on grass. fair enough, but he would be destroyed by Fed on Hard courts. So Nadal beat Verdasco at the AO after 5 hours and hardly getting any rest, he beat Federer. They say that AO is slower HC, but Nadal also won the olympics on fast HC. At that point, *******s had to come up with something else. Oh yeah, The US open thing. It seems like the last shelter for *******s, the holy grail. what will thay come up with when Nadal wins the US open?

volleynets
05-19-2010, 12:35 AM
Stupid thread.

Every Fed and Nadal thread both camps bring up stupid things. Fed FO was a fluke, Nadal never can win USO, Federer should retire, Nadal should retire. I don't like your bias.

Rhino
05-19-2010, 12:38 AM
Do I sense a man-crush here?

Speranza
05-19-2010, 01:00 AM
Do I sense a man-crush here?

Watson: :)

Rippy
05-19-2010, 01:12 AM
Stupid thread. *******s and *********s both say stuff like that. And indeed, if Nadal won the US Open, Fed would still have significantly more slams.

dropshot winner
05-19-2010, 01:12 AM
Well Federer does have 6 finals and 5 titles in NY to Nadals 0 and 0.

There are basically only two big tournaments whose surfaces weren't slowed down to great extent, and those are (by coincidence?) both tournaments were Nadal never made it past the SF.

Relatively speaking, fast hardcourt is to Nadal what clay is to Federer.

jamesblakefan#1
05-19-2010, 01:29 AM
At that point, *******s had to come up with something else. Oh yeah, The US open thing. It seems like the last shelter for *******s, the holy grail. what will thay come up with when Nadal wins the US open?

Cincinnati. Everyone knows that is the real slam. :)

Sangria
05-19-2010, 01:46 AM
I understand how the OP feels, however yes its silly to create a thread on it, simply because both camps have "that" usual poster who was born to defy all logic and perpetually bash their precious idol's nemesis. :(

TTW is the Iraq of all tennis discussion forums. :)

namelessone
05-19-2010, 01:51 AM
Well Federer does have 6 finals and 5 titles in NY to Nadals 0 and 0.

There are basically only two big tournaments whose surfaces weren't slowed down to great extent, and those are (by coincidence?) both tournaments were Nadal never made it past the SF.

Relatively speaking, fast hardcourt is to Nadal what clay is to Federer.

What,Cincy and USO? Nadal's only fault there is to have met great HC'ers in the last years there and before 2008 he wasn't even mediocre on fast courts,he was pretty weak(basically the only exception being his madrid 2005 indoors title and paris 07' final,both on very fast courts). Nadal wasn't that great even in slower AO before 08',not being able to make it past QF. Nadal has only matured on HC in 2008 IMO. He made a lot of deep runs in HC tourneys both in 08' and 09',made two consecutive semifinals at his worst slams(AO and USO) and if I am not mistaken,he was the guy with the most HC points in 09'.

IMO with a lucky draw Nadal could feasibly win either Cincy or USO. He is a solid SF guy on HC but is not in the top 5 HC'ers whereas game is concerned. If you look at the second half of 2009,amongst injuries and other problems,Nadal was the most consistent HC'er other than djoker. In 2010,he made F,QF,SF,SF(and in the last two he had a real chance to go to the finals and win the title but he squandered it), unlike many other guys who fell early on. Only roddick has been more consistent on HC in 2010 IMO.

All these stats are even more impressive when you consider the fact that everything Nadal does on a HC today is anti-HC style. Spinny strokes instead of flatter ones,spinny serves instead of big booming ones,baseline play instead of getting to the net once in a while. Nadal would have been a juggernaut with a proper serve.

mandy01
05-19-2010, 01:51 AM
I understand how the OP feels, however yes its silly to create a thread on it, simply because both camps have "that" usual poster who was born to defy all logic and perpetually bash their precious idol's nemesis. :(

TTW is the Iraq of all tennis discussion forums. :)
True

........................

Hitman
05-19-2010, 02:05 AM
Nadal would have been a juggernaut with a proper serve.

That's a price you pay when you decide to switch from your natural hand to the other one.

If he didn't, would he have been as successful?

dropshot winner
05-19-2010, 02:26 AM
What,Cincy and USO? Nadal's only fault there is to have met great HC'ers in the last years there and before 2008 he wasn't even mediocre on fast courts,he was pretty weak(basically the only exception being his madrid 2005 indoors title and paris 07' final,both on very fast courts). Nadal wasn't that great even in slower AO before 08',not being able to make it past QF. Nadal has only matured on HC in 2008 IMO. He made a lot of deep runs in HC tourneys both in 08' and 09',made two consecutive semifinals at his worst slams(AO and USO) and if I am not mistaken,he was the guy with the most HC points in 09'.

IMO with a lucky draw Nadal could feasibly win either Cincy or USO. He is a solid SF guy on HC but is not in the top 5 HC'ers whereas game is concerned. If you look at the second half of 2009,amongst injuries and other problems,Nadal was the most consistent HC'er other than djoker. In 2010,he made F,QF,SF,SF(and in the last two he had a real chance to go to the finals and win the title but he squandered it), unlike many other guys who fell early on. Only roddick has been more consistent on HC in 2010 IMO.

All these stats are even more impressive when you consider the fact that everything Nadal does on a HC today is anti-HC style. Spinny strokes instead of flatter ones,spinny serves instead of big booming ones,baseline play instead of getting to the net once in a while. Nadal would have been a juggernaut with a proper serve.
Yes and Federer's fault on clay is having met Nadal.

As I said, relatively speaking, fast hardcourts is for Nadal what clay is for Federer. Fortunately for Nadal there are almost no fast hardcourts left.

Besides, the whole spin thing is nonsense. The slow to medium paced hardcourts and grass take spin extremely well.

It's a myth that Nadal is playing in an era that doesn't suit his game. It's the slow-surface-baseline-era, which is perfect for him, serves are somewhat disarmed, points are usually long and physical and movement/footwork is extremly important, only a clay-only-era would suit his game more.

And you know what, Federer would be an even bigger juggernaut with a backhand like Nalbandian/Agassi or even Nadal. So what's your point?

Speranza
05-19-2010, 02:51 AM
That's a price you pay when you decide to switch from your natural hand to the other one.

If he didn't, would he have been as successful?

Holmes: I do believe this point (raised many times before) was mentioned the other day in the Madrid final or thereabouts. Either the infamous uncle Toni or Sir Nadal himself were quoted as saying that Rafa may well not have been been AS successful. :shock:

sh@de
05-19-2010, 03:24 AM
Cincinnati. Everyone knows that is the real slam. :)

HAHAHA win!!

kournacopia
05-19-2010, 06:03 AM
Fed had a bad back at AO09.

SiriusTennis
05-19-2010, 08:14 AM
Stupid thread.

Every Fed and Nadal thread both camps bring up stupid things. Fed FO was a fluke, Nadal never can win USO, Federer should retire, Nadal should retire. I don't like your bias.

This pretty much sums up the entire forum 90% of the time.

P_Agony
05-19-2010, 09:40 AM
Everytime thereīs a thread about Nadal or Federer, some *******s have to bring up somemething about the US open. Itīs like the holy grail, i mean, itīs the main argument to put Nadal down. AO is also HC, maybe slower, but who gives a damn? US open is also the only GS that forces players to play semis on saturday and final on sunday. 2 five setters in a row?? Some years ago, Fedtars used to say that Nadal was only a clay-courts wonder. Then Nadal reached 2 WB finals and beat federer in 2008. Then , they said that he was also good on grass. fair enough, but he would be destroyed by Fed on Hard courts. So Nadal beat Verdasco at the AO after 5 hours and hardly getting any rest, he beat Federer. They say that AO is slower HC, but Nadal also won the olympics on fast HC. At that point, *******s had to come up with something else. Oh yeah, The US open thing. It seems like the last shelter for *******s, the holy grail. what will thay come up with when Nadal wins the US open?

Wow, relax man.

First of all, I think Rafa WILL win the USO, it's just a matter of time. It'll be tough, as it's his worst surface by far and it really doesn't suit him, but Rafa has proved that when he wants something badly, he gets it. Rafa actually had some pretty consistent results in the USO.

In 2007 he was stopped by a red hot Ferrer who went on having his best HC season and reaching the TMC final that year (also beating Nadal in the proccess). In 2008 Nadal was stopped by Murray, who was considered the best HC player around and won Cincy that year as well. In 2009 Nadal was stopped by DP, who became the eventual champion.

One of these years Nadal will avoid a great HC player in the semis and will reach the final. If he meets Fed there, he will become the champion IMO, no matter how well Fed plays (because Rafa is in Roger's head).

bolo
05-19-2010, 09:49 AM
Yep he's made lots of folks look silly and they never learn, which isn't that surprising either because a lot of the silliness comes out of bias (not talented etc.); that never changes.

US open is next. :)

P_Agony
05-19-2010, 09:50 AM
Yep he's made lots of folks look silly and they never learn, which isn't that surprising either because a lot of the silliness comes out of bias (not talented etc.); that never changes.

US open is next. :)

I think it's more silly to write off topic stuff in threads. Especially after my previous post, you fail, badly.

bolo
05-19-2010, 09:53 AM
I think it's more silly to write off topic stuff in threads. Especially after my previous post, you fail, badly.

Don't start getting paranoid, my post had nothing to do with yours and was directly relevant to the op.

Augustus
05-19-2010, 10:04 AM
Wow, relax man.

First of all, I think Rafa WILL win the USO, it's just a matter of time. It'll be tough, as it's his worst surface by far and it really doesn't suit him, but Rafa has proved that when he wants something badly, he gets it. Rafa actually had some pretty consistent results in the USO.

In 2007 he was stopped by a red hot Ferrer who went on having his best HC season and reaching the TMC final that year (also beating Nadal in the proccess). In 2008 Nadal was stopped by Murray, who was considered the best HC player around and won Cincy that year as well. In 2009 Nadal was stopped by DP, who became the eventual champion.

One of these years Nadal will avoid a great HC player in the semis and will reach the final. If he meets Fed there, he will become the champion IMO, no matter how well Fed plays (because Rafa is in Roger's head).

I have to disagree with you here. While Nadal certainly has a shot if he plays Federer, it's no given he will win in my opinion. He has the mental edge, but it's not like Federer never beat him before. The surface favours Federer a lot, so if he plays close to his best he will win. But, as we all know, the mental factor plays a major part in this rivalry, so I'd say it's a toss-up.

P_Agony
05-19-2010, 10:10 AM
I have to disagree with you here. While Nadal certainly has a shot if he plays Federer, it's no given he will win in my opinion. He has the mental edge, but it's not like Federer never beat him before. The surface favours Federer a lot, so if he plays close to his best he will win. But, as we all know, the mental factor plays a major part in this rivalry, so I'd say it's a toss-up.

Maybe I'm not giving Fed enough credit, but Fed should have won that AO match and didn't, and it's been a long time (since 2007) since Fed defeated Nadal at a slam. I truly think the surface they play on is less relevant than the matchup and mental attitude towards each other.

billnepill
05-19-2010, 10:27 AM
What,Cincy and USO? Nadal's only fault there is to have met great HC'ers in the last years there and before 2008 he wasn't even mediocre on fast courts,he was pretty weak(basically the only exception being his madrid 2005 indoors title and paris 07' final,both on very fast courts). Nadal wasn't that great even in slower AO before 08',not being able to make it past QF. Nadal has only matured on HC in 2008 IMO. He made a lot of deep runs in HC tourneys both in 08' and 09',made two consecutive semifinals at his worst slams(AO and USO) and if I am not mistaken,he was the guy with the most HC points in 09'.

Well , that's the point. What's yours? That he is getting better? He surely is.

Augustus
05-19-2010, 10:29 AM
Maybe I'm not giving Fed enough credit, but Fed should have won that AO match and didn't, and it's been a long time (since 2007) since Fed defeated Nadal at a slam. I truly think the surface they play on is less relevant than the matchup and mental attitude towards each other.

The AO match was frustrating, but the low first serve percentage played a part as well. In fact that match and the USO final against Del Potro have a lot in common. Nadal vs. Federer in New York would be very interesting, that's for sure; if it goes five again I'd give Nadal the edge.

But Federer has proven he can beat Nadal, so I still believe he can do it again.

P_Agony
05-19-2010, 11:04 AM
The AO match was frustrating, but the low first serve percentage played a part as well. In fact that match and the USO final against Del Potro have a lot in common. Nadal vs. Federer in New York would be very interesting, that's for sure; if it goes five again I'd give Nadal the edge.

But Federer has proven he can beat Nadal, so I still believe he can do it again.

Well, Fed served 11 DFs if I remember correctly. That's awful for any player, but especially for Fed who usually hits very little DFs. Maybe a Fed vs. Nadal USO final will happen this year, but I have to admit Fed/Nadal matches have lost their spark a long time ago. Now it's just a bad matchup.

I would take Federer vs. Murray any day.

Augustus
05-19-2010, 11:14 AM
Well, Fed served 11 DFs if I remember correctly. That's awful for any player, but especially for Fed who usually hits very little DFs. Maybe a Fed vs. Nadal USO final will happen this year, but I have to admit Fed/Nadal matches have lost their spark a long time ago. Now it's just a bad matchup.

I would take Federer vs. Murray any day.

It's still something special to me, although their matches on clay have become predictable. I'd love to see them play on hardcourts more often, but I agree Federer vs. Murray matches are usually great as well. Their match at the 2008 TMC was truly epic.