PDA

View Full Version : The Unbeatable Rafa


TheNatural
06-11-2011, 12:48 PM
great article, havnt seen it posted

The Unbeatable Rafa (http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/06/06/the-unbeatable-rafa/) by Joe Posnanski, 6 June 2011

http://sijoeposnanski.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/rafael-nadal-grand-slam-trophies-10.jpg?w=641&h=431

There was a single point during Sundayís Rafael Nadal-Roger Federer match that actually made me shudder. I donít often shudder during sporting events. To be honest about it, I donít often shudder, period. I am lucky enough to live a pretty shudder-free life.

But there was something about this point ó well, I was rooting for Federer to win (like always). This has nothing at all to do with the personalities. I like Rafael Nadal very much. I like the way he kind of blushes and protests whenever people ask him if heís the greatest tennis player ever. I like the quiet way he knows how much he intimidates. I like that heís a huge fan of other sports. I like the time he puts into charity. And, if you like tennis at all, you cannot help but be overwhelmed by the way he plays. He is like a blend of some of the giants of the game ó a little bit of Connors, a little bit of Borg, a little bit of Agassi, a little bit of Laver. He plays with passion but he also plays with control. He is a fighter, but heís also an artist. He hits ridiculous shots all the time. It is impossible, I think, to watch him play and not feel awed.

Still, I root for Federer every time. Thatís from the gut. I donít know that I can explain it, but I guess it might be this: The way my life turned out, the most perfect athletic representation of my ambition is Roger Federer. That is to say Ö I probably played tennis at a higher level than I played any other sport. It was a pathetically low level, but we can only work with what we have. Tennis was the last sport I gave up on as a dream. I realized young that I wasnít going to be tall enough to play basketball, and I wasnít going to be strong or fast enough to play football. I clung to my baseball dream until my early teens, when it became clear that my incessant fear of getting plunked (and my Tony Pena Jr.-like average) did not bode well for my major league future.

Into high school, though, I believed that I had a chance to play professional tennis. I banged tennis balls against the brick wall of the local supermarket for hour upon hour. My highest ideal was Roger Federer. Of course, I did not know who Roger Federer was then ó heck, he was 3 or 4 years old at the time. But what I daydreamed about was playing with his sort of artistry, his sort of grace, his sort of touch. What I daydreamed about was combining the baseline power of Ivan Lendl with the brilliant touch of John McEnroe. It seemed a silly thing, an impossible combination. Then, when my ideal had long faded, Federer came along. And watching him Ö well, you know how the right song can trigger a precise feeling, can almost physically take you back to a certain time and place?* Watching Federer has long taken me back to that parking lot, and that supermarket wall, and those unrealistic childhood dreams that I held on to for longer than seemed practical.

*One of those songs for me is John Cougar Mellencampís ďAinít Even Done With The Night.Ē I donít even think I like that song. But when I hear it, Iím 14 years old again and walking with friends under a bright sun.

So I was rooting for Federer, as usual, and there was this point during Sundayís French Open Final Ö it was pretty clear by then that Nadal would win. There had been some hope for Federer in the first set, when he broke serve and had a few chances to win the thing. But the truth is that when they are both right, Federer cannot beat Nadal. It has been talked about time and again: Federer is the greatest player of all time. And heís not the greatest player of his own time. This was the 25th time they faced each other, and Nadal has won 17 of those matches. It was this way from the start ó Nadal beat Federer the first time they played in 2004, and then after losing a five-setter to Federer in Miami (he actually led two sets to love), Nadal won the next five.

It should be said that there was a brief time, from Wimbledon 2006 through 2007, when Federer won five out of seven matches against Nadal. He even beat Nadal on clay during that stretch ó heís only beaten Nadal on clay twice through the years. But excepting that stretch and the odd upset or two in Madrid or London, the best Federer can hope to do against Nadal is extend him. Federerís game is scissors. Nadalís game is stone.

Once Nadal came back and won that first set, the result was determined. All Federer could realistically do was keep the match going and hope for Nadal to break, which is no hope at all. Nadal does not break. Federer played some inspired tennis, I thought. He broke Nadalís serve in the second set to force a tiebreaker. He won the third set. It was wonderful to watch, and it showed ó like Federerís upset of Novak Djokovic showed ó that Federer still has some fight and brilliance left in him. But even while he was doing it, he seemed only to be postponing Nadalís trophy ceremony. And he was.

And there was this point ó Iím sure, looking back it would blend in with a dozen other points ó when Federer was blasting away against Nadal. He must have hit four or five shots that would have been winners against almost anybody else. And every one of them came blasting right back at him.

And thatís when I shuddered. There is something about intimidation in sports that is hard to define. There is, of course, blatant intimidation ó a pitcher throwing fastballs high and tight, Dick Butkus talking about knocking somebodyís head off, Patrick Ewing purposely goaltending the first two or three shots of a national championship game. Nadal does some of that with the muscle shirts he wears* and the way he carries himself.

*ĒIf I had Rafael Nadalís arms, Iíd wear those shirts all the time. Iíd wear those shirts to funerals.Ē
ó Michael Schur on this weekís emergency replacement Poscast. More on this later this afternoon.

But thereís a whole other kind of intimidation ó a much scarier kind to me ó that comes from someone or something being inescapable. The thing that made the original Terminator such an intimidating movie character, I think, is that he would not stop. He could not stop. He was programmed to kill, and this goal took up 100% of his circuitry. He wanted to kill Sarah Connor more than she wanted to stay alive. That feeling of no escape is suffocating in ways that sheer force and will and power is not. Andy Roddick hits perhaps the hardest serve in the history of tennis. But somehow that doesnít feel as intimidating to me as a player who runs everything down and never stops and returns the ball harder than you hit it in the first place.

For that moment, during that point, while watching Nadal return shot after shot against Federer ó this bloodless pummeling of Federerís body ó I imagined myself in Federerís place on the other side of the court from Nadal. I imagined hitting the best shots available in my imagination. I was hitting lines. I was moving him side to side. I angled a brilliant forehand to hit to the deuce court. Then, upon the inevitable return, I hit the perfect backhand off the line on the ad court. He reached that too. Back and forth. I hit the ball so hard it turned into fire. He returned it. I overhead slammed the ball so the bounce went to the 23rd row. He ran into the crowd and hit it back. Even in my imagination, even with only my own mind to hold me back, I could not figure out a way to put Rafael Nadal away.

I think, when heís done playing, Nadal will be universally accepted as the best who ever lived. He will need to win at least seven more Grand Slam titles, because thatís how many he needs (right now) to pass Federer on the list, and we do base our greatness on numbers*. But I suspect that he will retire with the Grand Slam record. Heís 25 years old. He is all but invincible in Paris. He has won the last two Wimbledons in which he has played. He has won 10 Grand Slam events. At 25, Federer had won eight.

*I keep having discussions with people about Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus ó if Tiger falls a major or two short of Jackís 18, could you still make the argument that he is the greatest player in the history of golf? Of course you CAN make the argument, and make it pretty convincingly. You could argue that Woods had a more dominant peak. You could argue that Woods played in an era when the quality of the fields went much deeper. You could argue that Woods succeeded under an intense scrutiny that Nicklaus did not face.

But I still think that if Woods doesnít catch Nicklaus in the majors race, then Jack is the best ever. I think this because Woods set the terms very early in his life. He set them when he was just a kid and he had a poster of Nicklaus on his wall and a chart showing all the major championships he had won. For Tiger Woods to achieve the goal of undisputed greatest ever, I think he has to win 19 majors.

....continues

TheNatural
06-11-2011, 12:48 PM
...continued

If Nadal passes Federer on the list, I don’t think there’s a legitimate argument to be made for anyone else as greatest ever. Nadal has won Grand Slams in the Australian heat, on the Paris clay, on the Wimbledon grass and in front of the New York crowd. He has won an Olympic gold medal. He has carried his team to Davis Cup victory. He has dominated the man who was widely viewed as the best who ever lived. He has won 83% of his matches, imposed his will against any and every style. It seemed that Novak Djokovic, who was on that incredible unbeaten streak, was ready to topple Nadal at the French Open, take over the No. 1 spot in the world, become the most dominant player in the world. And he might still do that. But players have had great streaks before — I’m not making the comparison, but I do remember that a player named Jose Luis Clerc once won 27 straight matches and four tournaments in A SINGLE MONTH.

Nadal has still won four of the last six Grand Slam titles — losing only in Australia, which is the least comfortable place for his game. If I had to guess, I would guess that Nadal will be the best in the world for a while longer. If I had to guess, he will win more than 17 Grand Slams. If I had to guess …

But this isn’t about guessing or the best in the world or the best ever or any of that. This is about the shudder. I always used to say that John Elway is probably not the greatest quarterback ever, but he’s the one who scared me most in the fourth quarter. Gary Sheffield probably wasn’t the best hitter in the game at any point, but he’s the one who would spark nightmares for me if I were a pitcher who had to get him out. Michael Jordan IS the greatest player ever (see the Point After in this coming week’s SI for more details) AND he is the scariest basketball player ever, because you know he would do anything to win.

In this way, Rafael has already won. Whether he becomes the greatest tennis player ever or not is beside the point for me now. He is the one player I could not beat even in my dreams.

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 01:00 PM
I wonder which point he was talking about.

jackson vile
06-11-2011, 01:29 PM
I thought Roger was going to win this to be honest. Especially with how the first set was unfolding at first. But then Rafa worked yet another one of his miracles and before you knew it he had won the first set. That is when I knew it was all over.

I am a bit disappointed that Roger gave up in the last set. However, IMO this is one of the most well fought and tactically so matches that Roger has ever played against Nadal at the FO. It did work, and Nadal looked as though he would be the one to give up.

It is scary to think that Roger making such great improvements still was not enough to beat a subpar Nadal. It made we wish for a Novak Nadal final instead.

Wim. could be where Federer really turns the tables this time, Nadal has only beaten him once there and Roger could perform a miracle himself. Heck, maybe he won't even need that.

Nadalfan89
06-11-2011, 01:33 PM
That article gave me chills. "The one player I could not beat even in my dreams".

TTMR
06-11-2011, 01:55 PM
Excellent article, if a tad egocentric. The reality is that the only way Nadal doesn't surpass Federer's GS total is career-ending or career-debilitating injury. It is something few want to admit given people's aesthetic preferences for Federer's game and Nadal's less marketable personality. Nadal doesn't have far to go and still has time on his side. The only man that has a chance to consistently be a roadblock is Djokovic unless a legitimate young star finally emerges.

TheTruth
06-11-2011, 02:06 PM
Great article!

JustBob
06-11-2011, 02:11 PM
"He's only 25, he already has 10 slams, hence he will surely beat Federer's GS record."

Using past performance as a predictor of future results. I hope that guy doesn't play the stock market.

pound cat
06-11-2011, 02:25 PM
I don't know that that point would make me shudder, but I know it would make me say someting along the lines of yikes, j.......c........ or some such expression of surpise and amazement.

Great piece of writing, and many thinks for posting it. The next time Federer plays Nadal there may very well be another one of those breathtaking points.

tennis_pro
06-11-2011, 03:05 PM
"He's only 25, he already has 10 slams, hence he will surely beat Federer's GS record."

Using past performance as a predictor of future results. I hope that guy doesn't play the stock market.


Yup, Nadal needs another 6 Slams, that's as many as Edberg or Becker accumulated IN THEIR CAREERS. To beat Federer's 16 he needs 7 more which is as many McEnroe won IN HIS WHOLE CAREER.

It's still too far away.

Cup8489
06-11-2011, 03:40 PM
Yup, Nadal needs another 6 Slams, that's as many as Edberg or Becker accumulated IN THEIR CAREERS. To beat Federer's 16 he needs 7 more which is as many McEnroe won IN HIS WHOLE CAREER.

It's still too far away.

Well, didnt you know? Some people can predict the future. I've heard people say they were dead certain rafa is going to break Fed's record. I'm not sure how they're certain, but they are.

Great article, though. And I agree.. Normally I'm not really impressed by Rafa, but his retrieving in that match was just... undescribable. Plain and simple.

It was an awesome display from both guys.. I'm actually bummed it didn't go 5 sets.. just because I wanted to see more.

Bud
06-11-2011, 03:46 PM
Well, didnt you know? Some people can predict the future. I've heard people say they were dead certain rafa is going to break Fed's record. I'm not sure how they're certain, but they are.

Great article, though. And I agree.. Normally I'm not really impressed by Rafa, but his retrieving in that match was just... undescribable. Plain and simple.

It was an awesome display from both guys.. I'm actually bummed it didn't go 5 sets.. just because I wanted to see more.

Nadal likes and respects Federer. He'll throw the GOAT a bone (or perhaps some grass) and stop just short of 16 so Federer can continue thinking he's the best :)

Sentinel
06-11-2011, 08:13 PM
Nice article.

when Federer was blasting away against Nadal. He must have hit four or five shots that would have been winners against almost anybody else. And every one of them came blasting right back at him.

When not blasting back exactly. Some came high over the net, and some were even lobbed back to the baseline, starting the point all over again. Just nitpicking, sorry.

Also regarding the "greatest of all time but not the greatest of his time", should the author not note that Rafa is facing the same situation against Noel. Rafa is the greatest clay courter ever, but not even the greatest of this time. Ironic. Lucky to escape Noel once, but how many times can he escape, time will tell.

Mustard
06-11-2011, 08:18 PM
Also regarding the "greatest of all time but not the greatest of his time", should the author not note that Rafa is facing the same situation against Noel. Rafa is the greatest clay courter ever, but not even the greatest of this time. Ironic. Lucky to escape Noel once, but how many times can he escape, time will tell.

LOL. Nadal has never lost to Djokovic in a major yet, has 10 majors to Djokovic's 2, and leads the head-to-head by 16-11. Djokovic has done more damage to Federer than Nadal, as he's beaten Federer 3 times in majors, twice on the way to his Australian Open victories.

Spider
06-11-2011, 08:47 PM
Nice article.


When not blasting back exactly. Some came high over the net, and some were even lobbed back to the baseline, starting the point all over again. Just nitpicking, sorry.

Also regarding the "greatest of all time but not the greatest of his time", should the author not note that Rafa is facing the same situation against Noel. Rafa is the greatest clay courter ever, but not even the greatest of this time. Ironic. Lucky to escape Noel once, but how many times can he escape, time will tell.

Not really. In the biggest stage Nadal has owned Djokovic. Nadal continues to own Federer in the biggest stage as usual. So it is again not comparible.

Bud
06-11-2011, 09:18 PM
LOL. Nadal has never lost to Djokovic in a major yet, has 10 majors to Djokovic's 2, and leads the head-to-head by 16-11. Djokovic has done more damage to Federer than Nadal, as he's beaten Federer 3 times in majors, twice on the way to his Australian Open victories.

In how many majors has Nadal beaten Djokovic?

5-0 in favor of Nadal :)

3 at RG
1 at Wimbledon
1 at the USO

He nearly has a Djoker slam!

Magnus
06-11-2011, 09:24 PM
I thought Roger was going to win this to be honest. Especially with how the first set was unfolding at first. But then Rafa worked yet another one of his miracles and before you knew it he had won the first set. That is when I knew it was all over.

I am a bit disappointed that Roger gave up in the last set. However, IMO this is one of the most well fought and tactically so matches that Roger has ever played against Nadal at the FO. It did work, and Nadal looked as though he would be the one to give up.

It is scary to think that Roger making such great improvements still was not enough to beat a subpar Nadal. It made we wish for a Novak Nadal final instead.

Wim. could be where Federer really turns the tables this time, Nadal has only beaten him once there and Roger could perform a miracle himself. Heck, maybe he won't even need that.

By miracles you mean another MTO in the first set (like we've seen a thousand times from Rafa)?

Yes, its Fed's fault he couldn't keep his concentration there, but I will never respect Nadal for his antics. Shame he has to resort to these since he's such a great player.

Magnus
06-11-2011, 09:26 PM
LOL. Nadal has never lost to Djokovic in a major yet, has 10 majors to Djokovic's 2, and leads the head-to-head by 16-11. Djokovic has done more damage to Federer than Nadal, as he's beaten Federer 3 times in majors, twice on the way to his Australian Open victories.

Nadal never beat THIS Djokovic in a slam. This is like meta-Djokovic. It took a brilliant Fed display, and four sets of tennis bliss to put the guy away. Also, in 2011 Djokovic is 4-0 against Nadal and 3-1 against Roger.

As for the article, I stopped reading when author reached Sarah Connor lol. Nadal fans will never admit that this article is a joke.

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 09:51 PM
Nadal never beat THIS Djokovic in a slam. This is like meta-Djokovic. It took a brilliant Fed display, and four sets of tennis bliss to put the guy away. Also, in 2011 Djokovic is 4-0 against Nadal and 3-1 against Roger.

As for the article, I stopped reading when author reached Sarah Connor lol. Nadal fans will never admit that this article is a joke.

Oh PLEASE. Did you watch the 2010 USO final? Novak was on fire and Rafa was simply better. There is nothing that impresses me about Novak MORE this year than in that final except he has brought that level to each and every match this year. He has literally played lights out tennis in each tournament. But you can't watch these highlights and say Novak wasn't on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxRDaJOBipM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKiEq8IrKJs&NR=1

8PAQ
06-11-2011, 09:51 PM
Nadal lost 7 times this year already. Would have been 8 if the GOAT didn't stop the King in the semi. Doesn't sound unbeatable to me.

cc0509
06-11-2011, 09:59 PM
Oh PLEASE. Did you watch the 2010 USO final? Novak was on fire and Rafa was simply better. There is nothing that impresses me about Novak MORE this year than in that final except he has brought that level to each and every match this year. He has literally played lights out tennis in each tournament. But you can't watch these highlights and say Novak wasn't on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxRDaJOBipM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKiEq8IrKJs&NR=1

You were the one who was posting on here after Rome and during the FO before the Djokovic/Federer SF that THIS Djokovic can't defeat Nadal and that NOBODY could beat this Djokovic weren't you?

You have to admit that if Federer did not knock out Djokovic, it is very possible that Djokovic would have defeated Nadal at the FO even though in the past Djokovic was not able to defeat Nadal in slams. None of us know for sure what would have happened, but it certainly looked like Djokovic would have been dangerous for Nadal, more so than it ever had looked in the past, especially since Nadal seemed mentally vulnerable at the time.

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 10:02 PM
You were the one who was posting on here after Rome and during the FO before the Djokovic/Federer SF that THIS Djokovic can't defeat Nadal and that NOBODY could beat this Djokovic weren't you?

You have to admit that if Federer did not knock out Djokovic, it is very possible that Djokovic would have defeated Nadal at the FO even though in the past Djokovic was not able to defeat Nadal in slams. None of us know for sure what would have happened, but it certainly looked like Djokovic would have been dangerous for Nadal, more so than it ever had looked in the past, especially since Nadal seemed mentally vulnerable at the time.

I completely agree with that. He had a real shot for sure. But that has a lot more to do with Nadal's form this year than Djokovic's change in form since last year. The same Djokovic that lost to Nadal at the USO last year may have beaten him at the French, because RAFA's level of play declined up until that final where he played much better.

cc0509
06-11-2011, 10:09 PM
I completely agree with that. He had a real shot for sure. But that has a lot more to do with Nadal's form this year than Djokovic's change in form since last year. The same Djokovic that lost to Nadal at the USO last year may have beaten him at the French, because RAFA's level of play declined up until that final where he played much better.



I agree with you that Rafa's form was definitely inferior to where it was at the USO and there is no question Rafa saves his best form for when it counts at the slams and against the best players, but, I am not so sure he would have pulled it off this year if Djokovic was on the other side of the net and not Federer (only because of the Djokovic/Nadal match up more recently and the lack of confidence Nadal looked like he was having against Djokovic.) Guess we will see where everything is at moving forward.

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 10:14 PM
I agree with you that Rafa's form was definitely inferior to where it was at the USO and there is no question Rafa saves his best form for when it counts at the slams and against the best players, but, I am not so sure he would have pulled it off this year if Djokovic was on the other side of the net and not Federer (only because of the Djokovic/Nadal match up more recently and the lack of confidence Nadal looked like he was having against Djokovic.) Guess we will see where everything is at moving forward.

It's a very uncertain time in tennis, that's for sure. Wimbledon is going to be INTERESTING.

Roger No.1
06-11-2011, 10:48 PM
Yup, Nadal needs another 6 Slams, that's as many as Edberg or Becker accumulated IN THEIR CAREERS. To beat Federer's 16 he needs 7 more which is as many McEnroe won IN HIS WHOLE CAREER.

It's still too far away.

I think so too. Federer won his 10th GS at 2007 AO, so it took him over 4 years to win another 6. Nadal is 25 and most likely won't be able to win 2-3 majors each year. And many assume Federer will not win another Slam. Then Nadal hasn't been playing as good this year, he will have Djokovic, Murray, Federer challenge him on most surfaces, even on clay

cc0509
06-11-2011, 10:51 PM
(It's not that uncertain. Rafa has won 4 of the last 5 slams, and the only slam he lost was the slam he tore a muscle in)

Don't be so sure. The only thing certain in life is death and taxes. This is just tennis and things change.

Sharpshooter
06-11-2011, 11:38 PM
I think so too. Federer won his 10th GS at 2007 AO, so it took him over 4 years to win another 6. Nadal is 25 and most likely won't be able to win 2-3 majors each year. And many assume Federer will not win another Slam. Then Nadal hasn't been playing as good this year, he will have Djokovic, Murray, Federer challenge him on most surfaces, even on clay

You mean it took him 3 years to win another 6.

But anyway, Nadal doesn't have to win 2-3 each year. If he gets 2 career grand slams I'd rate his slam total over Fed's.

Sharpshooter
06-11-2011, 11:39 PM
Don't be so sure. The only thing certain in life is death and taxes. This is just tennis and things change.

You forgot the rising petrol prices

Sid_Vicious
06-11-2011, 11:43 PM
You forgot the rising petrol prices
Sharpshooter,Are you from the UK? Just wondering.

Sharpshooter
06-11-2011, 11:44 PM
Sharpshooter,Are you from the UK? Just wondering.

Nope, from Australia

Sid_Vicious
06-11-2011, 11:51 PM
Nope, from Australia
Cool, man! It is time to ditch Rafa and cheer for Tomic. :)

Sharpshooter
06-12-2011, 12:15 AM
Cool, man! It is time to ditch Rafa and cheer for Tomic. :)

I do cheer for Tomic, but I can hardly talk about him here since the forums are dominated by Fed and Rafa talk.

Was impressive at the AO this year he has a bright future.

ninman
06-12-2011, 12:22 AM
Nadal loses more times in one year than Federer did in 3 and suddenly he's "unbeatable". Federer also made 10 straight finals, winning 8, Nadal has done nothing even close to that.

Bobby Jr
06-12-2011, 12:36 AM
Nadal has still won four of the last six Grand Slam titles — losing only in Australia...
I love how stats like these get so conveniently packaged.

He's also won 4 of the last 9.... It doesn't paint quite the same picture when you write it like that though.

ninman
06-12-2011, 12:49 AM
I love how stats like these get so conveniently packaged.

He's also won 4 of the last 9.... It doesn't paint quite the same picture when you write it like that though.

Yeah, not to mention that Federer went on a streak where he made 18 GS finals from 19 slams entered. That sounds a lot better to be honest.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 12:51 AM
Yeah, not to mention that Federer went on a streak where he made 18 GS finals from 19 slams entered. That sounds a lot better to be honest.

Dude, we know. Man it would be nice to have a different discussion for once than who's better. There's only one poster in here hyping Rafa up, let him.

Speranza
06-12-2011, 12:55 AM
Holmes: The title of this thread is "The Unbeatable Rafa". Before I even read it, I did a word search for Novak in the body of text...

It mentioned his impressive unbeaten run. It did not mention that Novak HAD beaten the unbeatable Rafa 4 TIMES in successive finals (regardless that they were NOT slams) this year alone. :?

A good article, but tarnished by its omissions. The title alone doesn't sit well for me. It applies to Federer, but not to all.

TennisFan3
06-12-2011, 01:02 AM
Oh PLEASE. Did you watch the 2010 USO final? Novak was on fire and Rafa was simply better. There is nothing that impresses me about Novak MORE this year than in that final except he has brought that level to each and every match this year. He has literally played lights out tennis in each tournament. But you can't watch these highlights and say Novak wasn't on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxRDaJOBipM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKiEq8IrKJs&NR=1

The thing is Novak is STILL playing at his UsO 2010 level. If anything, his serve is better and he is even more aggressive with his forehand. Also he's more solid mentally compared to before.

Nadal OTOH has declined so badly from the UsO '10 level - it's not even funny. The serve is pretty obvious, but among other things look at how aggressive he was with his backhand and how often he hit his off-forehand (DTL and I/O). Basically the UsO Nadal was a totally different player - self assure, mentally strong, very aggressive etc.

The way Nadal is playing these days, Djokovic doesn't have to play out of his skin to beat him. Had Djoker reached the RG final, he would've taken care of Rafa in routine fashion IMO. At least the Rafa that turned up against Fed.
I'm hoping that Nadal plays with less pressure, now that he's won the F.O. But yeah, his F.O level won't cut it on SW19. I think he needs a BIG loss to shake him up and come out of his shell. If you play bad and keep on winning, that sometimes even more dangerous than the reverse..

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 01:06 AM
Oh PLEASE. Did you watch the 2010 USO final? Novak was on fire and Rafa was simply better. There is nothing that impresses me about Novak MORE this year than in that final except he has brought that level to each and every match this year. He has literally played lights out tennis in each tournament. But you can't watch these highlights and say Novak wasn't on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxRDaJOBipM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKiEq8IrKJs&NR=1

I completely agree with that. He had a real shot for sure. But that has a lot more to do with Nadal's form this year than Djokovic's change in form since last year. The same Djokovic that lost to Nadal at the USO last year may have beaten him at the French, because RAFA's level of play declined up until that final where he played much better.

The thing is Novak is STILL playing at his UsO 2010 level. If anything, his serve is better and he is even more aggressive with his forehand. Also he's more solid mentally compared to before.

Nadal OTOH has declined so badly from the UsO '10 level - it's not even funny. The serve is pretty obvious, but among other things look at how aggressive he was with his backhand and how often he hit his off-forehand (DTL and I/O).

The way Nadal is playing these days, Djokovic doesn't have to play out of his skin to beat him. I'm hoping that Nadal plays with less pressure, now that he's won the F.O.
His F.O level won't cut it on SW19..

That's basically what I'm trying to say. I agree completely.

Sentinel
06-12-2011, 02:41 AM
Nadal lost 7 times this year already. Would have been 8 if the GOAT didn't stop the King in the semi. Doesn't sound unbeatable to me.
unbeatable rafa injured at AO, and tired since the beginning of season.

unbeatable rafa only beaten by undestroyable Noel (after AO, before Queens).

illuminati
06-12-2011, 02:47 AM
nadal is now the clay GOAT

nadal is now the 4th overall GOAT after federer, laver and sampras.

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 02:57 AM
Holmes: The title of this thread is "The Unbeatable Rafa". Before I even read it, I did a word search for Novak in the body of text...

It mentioned his impressive unbeaten run. It did not mention that Novak HAD beaten the unbeatable Rafa 4 TIMES in successive finals (regardless that they were NOT slams) this year alone. :?

A good article, but tarnished by its omissions. The title alone doesn't sit well for me. It applies to Federer, but not to all.

You know the drill, Holmes.

Rafa does not care about Mickey Mouse events like IW, Miami or clay masters.

In fact, if Rafa had the proper interest and motivation he could find a cure for AIDS and cancer in a month!

Talk about being a GOAT.

Speranza
06-12-2011, 03:51 AM
You know the drill, Holmes.

Rafa does not care about Mickey Mouse events like IW, Miami or clay masters.

In fact, if Rafa had the proper interest and motivation he could find a cure for AIDS and cancer in a month!

Talk about being a GOAT.

Holmes: What is this you proclaim L of B?? He doesn't care about smaller Masters events??? I apologize then. Perhaps those that like to shout from the rooftops that he has the most Masters records, might want to consider their vocal chords next time :)

Thank the Powers That Be for the more balanced Ralph fans in this forum. I feel for them often as they're often engulfed by their not so level headed brethren.

zagor
06-12-2011, 03:54 AM
Oh PLEASE. Did you watch the 2010 USO final? Novak was on fire and Rafa was simply better. There is nothing that impresses me about Novak MORE this year than in that final except he has brought that level to each and every match this year. He has literally played lights out tennis in each tournament. But you can't watch these highlights and say Novak wasn't on fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxRDaJOBipM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKiEq8IrKJs&NR=1

Highlights are highlights,any match between 2 top players can look great if we just show the best points played by both players.Overall Novak's form in 2010 USO was a far cry from the form he displayed at AO this year.At USO he almost to Troicki at the start,struggled greatly with nervous and error prone Fed etc. compared to AO where he just blitzed the field(including Fed)losing one set,sure you could argue AO surface suits his game more but even taking that fact into consideration the level is hardly comparable.

This year Novak's serve had much better placement than 2010 overall(not just USO),his FH has more pace and depth(probably still not at 2008 level but much better than last yea still),his movement and defense have been by far the best in his career,his ROS as well etc etc.

As great of a player Nadal is,the tennis world doesn't revolve around him,sure Nadal's level dropped since USO but Novak raised his level considerably from 2010.

The thing is Novak is STILL playing at his UsO 2010 level.

If Novak were playing at his 2010 USO level this year the winning streak would be nonexistant.

abmk
06-12-2011, 04:08 AM
Highlights are highlights,any match between 2 top players can look great if we just show the best points played by both players.Overall Novak's form in 2010 USO was a far cry from the form he displayed at AO this year.At USO he almost to Troicki at the start,struggled greatly with nervous and error prone Fed etc. compared to AO where he just blitzed the field(including Fed)losing one set,sure you could argue AO surface suits his game more but even taking that fact into consideration the level is hardly comparable.

This year Novak's serve had much better placement than 2010 overall(not just USO),his FH has more pace and depth(probably still not at 2008 level but much better than last yea still),his movement and defense have been by far the best in his career,his ROS as well etc etc.

As great of a player Nadal is,the tennis world doesn't revolve around him,sure Nadal's level dropped since USO but Novak raised his level considerably from 2010.



If Novak were playing at his 2010 USO level this year the winning streak would be nonexistant.

agreed, Novak is playing by some distance better this year ( especially the AO) than at the USO last year

TheTruth
06-12-2011, 06:45 AM
(You got fooled by his serve. He obviously made a conscious decision to moderate the service speed during RG. Already at Queens he served 128mph a few times and regularly around 120mph. Last year at Wimbledon he served 116mph on average. If anything he's probably added more speed since last year's Wimbledon. Although the slice serve was the key at 2008 and 2010 Wimbledon, and that's not a serve he uses at RG. So you can't read anything into his serve based on RG. His grass serving is faster and includes slice. He looked better at Queens this year than last year. Tsonga was on fire serving 25 aces, yet Rafa won the 1st set and was 4-4 in 2nd set before tiredness set in - wisely avoiding another 2 matches)

During the FO they did a segment with Uncle Toni. It must have been on the Tennis Channel, because Toni sat down with Gimelstob. The plan was to use the slow serve throughout the French and not the bigger one.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-12-2011, 06:52 AM
Anyone who claims that the Novak of the last 6 months is anywhere close to how he played against Rafa in USO10 is completely delusional. Today's Novak would dismantle Nadal in the USO in straight sets.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 01:23 PM
Highlights are highlights,any match between 2 top players can look great if we just show the best points played by both players.Overall Novak's form in 2010 USO was a far cry from the form he displayed at AO this year.At USO he almost to Troicki at the start,struggled greatly with nervous and error prone Fed etc. compared to AO where he just blitzed the field(including Fed)losing one set,sure you could argue AO surface suits his game more but even taking that fact into consideration the level is hardly comparable.

This year Novak's serve had much better placement than 2010 overall(not just USO),his FH has more pace and depth(probably still not at 2008 level but much better than last yea still),his movement and defense have been by far the best in his career,his ROS as well etc etc.

As great of a player Nadal is,the tennis world doesn't revolve around him,sure Nadal's level dropped since USO but Novak raised his level considerably from 2010.



If Novak were playing at his 2010 USO level this year the winning streak would be nonexistant.

I disagree. Who has he played this year that played a HIGHER level of tennis than he did last year in the semi and final of the US Open? No one has produced that level of tennis until Federer at the FO in the semi's. You have to realize Novak's level in the US Open final was very similar to now, equal IMO. It's just no one can compete at that level except Murray, Federer and Nadal. If Djokovic was playing THAT MUCH better this year why did he almost lose in Miami to a Nadal that isn't playing anywhere near his level of 2010 USO Rafa? Can't have it both ways.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 01:25 PM
Anyone who claims that the Novak of the last 6 months is anywhere close to how he played against Rafa in USO10 is completely delusional. Today's Novak would dismantle Nadal in the USO in straight sets.

Right, the one that Belucci was pushing? That Murray almost beat? That got HANDLED in the first set vs Nadal at IW? That went to a 3rd set tiebreak in Miami? You guys need to stop acting like he's on some other planet.

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 01:29 PM
Right, the one that Belucci was pushing? That Murray almost beat? That got HANDLED in the first set vs Nadal at IW? That went to a 3rd set tiebreak in Miami? You guys need to stop acting like he's on some other planet.

Of course the crucial factor in all these matches is that he had the mentality to get the win.

Do you think Djokovic of 2010 would have what it takes to come back from one set to love and defeat Nadal in the final twice?

Or break Murray as he's serving for the match?

Or to storm back after being 3-1 down against Belluci in the third?

It ain't about the technique of his strokes or "being on another planet".

This is about having his head screwed on right.

Making the right shots when it really counts.

This is the new Nole which we did not see too much of in the past few years.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 01:51 PM
Of course the crucial factor in all these matches is that he had the mentality to get the win.

Do you think Djokovic of 2010 would have what it takes to come back from one set to love and defeat Nadal in the final twice?

Or break Murray as he's serving for the match?

Or to storm back after being 3-1 down against Belluci in the third?

It ain't about the technique of his strokes or "being on another planet".

This is about having his head screwed on right.

Making the right shots when it really counts.

This is the new Nole which we did not see too much of in the past few years.

No I don't. Im talking specifically about his level in the SEMI'S and FINAL of the US Open. My statement is the way he played in those 2 matches is the consistency he has brought to each and every match this year. He wasn't able to bring that CONSISTENCY to each of his matches last year. Just 2. But he isn't playing much BETTER than he did in those TWO matches.

zagor
06-12-2011, 01:51 PM
Who has he played this year that played a HIGHER level of tennis than he did last year in the semi and final of the US Open?

Federer who was playing pretty good at AO and Novak took him down in straights.Fed could have played a better match tactically but IMO his level of play was better than that nervous rushing errorfest he displayed at USO SF.

No one has produced that level of tennis until Federer at the FO in the semi's.

So you're gonna take one match in the last 6 months that Novak lost to prove a point? Sure he lost to an inspired Federer,he had to lose sometimes.

You have to realize Novak's level in the US Open final was very similar to now, equal IMO.

Can't realize something I don't believe,Novak's level didn't magically go up in the final(he's not Nadal,Sampras or Federer type player that can switch into higher gear in a slam final),he played some good tennis in patches throughout the tourney but nothing mind blowing and certainly nothing that would allow him to go almost 6 months undefeated.

It's just no one can compete at that level except Murray, Federer and Nadal.

Yes and Novak has beaten them all multiple times this year while last year he had very few wins against top 10 players.

If Djokovic was playing THAT MUCH better this year why did he almost lose in Miami to a Nadal that isn't playing anywhere near his level of 2010 USO Rafa? Can't have it both ways.

Can't really see your point,they're 2 top players who played a close match which Novak afterall won and played it on a surface which is unique and different than the one at USO.As for Nadal being so far from his 2010 USO level,didn't he butcher Fed in Miami SF?


Again,can't see Novak having such an amazing winning streak if he stayed at 2010 USO level,heck I doubt he would have beaten Fed at AO for starters.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 01:57 PM
Federer who was playing pretty good at AO and Novak took him down in straights.Fed could have played a better match tactically but IMO his level of play was better than that nervous rushing errorfest he displayed at USO SF.



So you're gonna take one match in the last 6 months that Novak lost to prove a point? Sure he lost to an inspired Federer,he had to lose sometimes.



Can't realize something I don't believe,Novak's level didn't magically go up in the final(he's not Nadal,Sampras or Federer type player that can switch into higher gear in a slam final),he played some good tennis in patches throughout the tourney but nothing mind blowing and certainly nothing that would allow him to go almost 6 months undefeated.



Yes and Novak has beaten them all multiple times this year while last year he had very few wins against top 10 players.



Can't really see your point,they're 2 top players who played a close match which Novak afterall won and played it on a surface which is unique and different than the one at USO.As for Nadal being so far from his 2010 USO level,didn't he butcher Fed in Miami SF?


Again,can't see Novak having such an amazing winning streak if he stayed at 2010 USO level,heck I doubt he would have beaten Fed at AO for starters.

I do, but as I said in the last post, he's bringing that level to every match, along with BELIEF. He isn't serving 15mph harder, or get twice as fast, or transform into some other-worldly being like people are going on about. He's just more consistent. He's had PLENTY of close matches this year but his belief and consistency gets him out.

JustBob
06-12-2011, 02:03 PM
Djoker is playing one level higher than he did last year at the USO and that should be pretty obvious to anyone with two eyes. His confidence, boosted by his Davis Cup win and propelled to new heights by his "streak" made him far more consistent and stronger mentally.

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 02:05 PM
No I don't. Im talking specifically about his level in the SEMI'S and FINAL of the US Open. My statement is the way he played in those 2 matches is the consistency he has brought to each and every match this year. He wasn't able to bring that CONSISTENCY to each of his matches last year. Just 2. But he isn't playing much BETTER than he did in those TWO matches.

What consistency?

He saved two MPs against Fed in the 5th and lost in 4 against Nadal.

One could argue that Nole of 2011 would have won the whole thing rather than lose it.

This argument about Nole's form could go on forever.

How do we measure a player's level compared to a previous season?

Stats like UE, winners, aces, etc. or titles won?

I'm not convinced we can assert this with certainty.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:06 PM
I do, but as I said in the last post, he's bringing that level to every match, along with BELIEF. He isn't serving 15mph harder, or get twice as fast, or transform into some other-worldly being like people are going on about. He's just more consistent. He's had PLENTY of close matches this year but his belief and consistency gets him out.

Yes he had some close matches(who doesn't in 40+ matches)but mainly because his opponent on that day was playing great tennis and taking it to him while in 2010 USO he was on the brink of losing to his pigeon Troicki and was down a few MPs against a ********,not to mention the rest of the year highlighted by melting down against Melzer in FO,getting smacked around by Verdasco on clay and overall going into USO with zero wins against top 10 players.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one but IMO he improved by some margin certain aspects of his game which enabled him to get such great results in the first half of this year,it's isn't just more consistency and mental strength.Whatever the reason his game just clicked this year while last year it didn't(not even at USO).

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:07 PM
Djoker is playing one level higher than he did last year at the USO and that should be pretty obvious to anyone with two eyes. His confidence, boosted by his Davis Cup win and propelled to new heights by his "streak" made him far more consistent and stronger mentally.

OK and how many times have I said that now? I completely agree. The only thing im downplaying is "the newwwwww novak" that everyone is going on about as far as his PHYSICAL level of play. Nadal's level at the US Open of last year would still eat him up, but since Nadal hasn't come anywhere close to that level, he's lost the last 4 matches. The level Rafa brought in the FO final would have probably been enough to win there too.

JustBob
06-12-2011, 02:14 PM
While it is true that Nadal's current level is a notch below last year's level, "eat him up" is a rather huge exaggeration. Even at his best level, I hardly believe he would have demolished Djoker in these 4 encounters. A 2-2 split would have been more likely.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:14 PM
Nadal's level at the US Open of last year would still eat him up,

Maybe but we can only speculate,I personally don't think he would,IMO it would be a 5 setter if they 2011 Novak played that 2010 USO final.

but since Nadal hasn't come anywhere close to that level, he's lost the last 4 matches.

Or maybe Novak lost USO final because he didn't play at the level he did in his last 4 matches he won against Nadal? It can go both ways and Novak does have a winning H2H against Nadal on HC.

The level Rafa brought in the FO final would have probably been enough to win there too.

What level? The one which enabled him to break Federer at 5-2,a game in which Roger couldn't get a single 1st serve in? Or the level that enabled him to win the 2nd set tiebreak in which Fed made 4-5 unforced errors? Face it,Nadal could play like crap and Fed would still find a way to lose that FO final.

TennisFan3
06-12-2011, 02:15 PM
If Novak were playing at his 2010 USO level this year the winning streak would be nonexistant.

Did you even read my "entire" sentence before quoting me? I said Novak is playing at UsO 2010 level, but his serve is better, forehand bigger and mentally stronger.

What does that mean? Novak 2011 >> Novak 2010 UsOpen.

That's on the one hand. On the other, Nadal has declined massively. And this is BEFORE he got those beatdowns from Djoker (so it's not all because of Djoker, as you seem to imply). Last time Nadal even served remotely well was in WTF 2010. His serve and ground game was shaky in AO 2011, IW and Miami. First he got bageled by Lacko and beaten by Davy in Doha. Then he got embarassed by Tomic in AO and beaten by Ferrer. He almost lost to Karlovic and Berdych in IW/Miami - coz he couldn't hold serve consistently if his life depended on it. To put this in perspective, Berdych hadn't even taken a set off Nadal in the last 6 meetings.

In IW/Miami , Novak wasn't even playing as well as he did in AO. Still he exposed Nadal's game and beat him anyway. This further destroyed Nadal's confidence. Then Nadal had a crappy clay court pre-FO season - which included almost losing to a qualifier Lorenzi, losing a set to an injured Murray, and to ******** in Madrid.

By this time Djokovic had improved his game from IW/Miami. So Novak 2011> Novak 2010 and Nadal 2011 <<<<<< Nadal UsO 2010. What happens when one guy improves and the other declines? Exactly. Straight set beatdowns , and we saw them in Rome/Madrid.

In RG, Nadal got a reprieve coz he probably would have lost to Djoker, but didn't have to face him. He talks every day of being under pressure, and this is reflecting in his game, because it's been a long time since I've seen him play this kind of tennis and choke so much. As your serve goes, so does your game. It's not a cliche. It's true for every player.

Forget about Wimbledon, from what I've seen in the clay season, Nadal won't win anything major this year, unless he improves his level massively from what he displayed in the F.O and the rest of the clay season..

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:18 PM
Maybe but we can only speculate,I personally don't think he would,IMO it would be a 5 setter if they 2011 Novak played that 2010 USO final.



Or maybe Novak lost USO final because he didn't play at the level he did in his last 4 matches he won against Nadal? It can go both ways and Novak does have a winning H2H against Nadal on HC.



What level? The one which enabled him to break Federer at 5-2,a game in which Roger couldn't get a single 1st serve in? Or the level that enabled him to win the 2nd set tiebreak in which Fed made 4-5 unforced errors? Face it,Nadal could play like crap and Fed would still find a way to lose that FO final.

I was waiting on this. Yeah, Novak wouldn't have made an unforced error the entire match and would have been guaranteed to get all his first serves in. Say what you want, Rafa's retrieving in that match was better than it had been in months and months, and his forehand was ON. I/O and DTL were both beast. Im sure it had nothing to do with Rafa.

JustBob
06-12-2011, 02:19 PM
I tend to agree. While Nada's current level was enough to win RG, I seriously doubt it will be sufficient at Wimbledon and the USO.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:21 PM
Did you even read my "entire" sentence before quoting me? I said Novak is playing at UsO 2010 level, but his serve is better, forehand bigger and mentally stronger.

What does that mean? Novak 2011 >> Novak 2010 UsOpen.

That's on the one hand. On the other, Nadal has declined massively. And this is BEFORE he got those beatdowns from Djoker. Last time Nadal even served remotely well was in WTF 2010. His serve and ground game was shaky in AO 2011 IW and Miami. He got embarassed by Tomic in AO and beaten by Ferrer. He almost lost to Karlovic and Berdych in IW/Miami - coz he couldn't hold serve consistently if his life depended on it. To put this in perspective, Berdych hadn't even taken a set off Nadal in the last 6 meetings.

In IW/Miami , Novak wasn't even playing as well as he did in AO. Still he exposed Nadal's game and beat him anyway. This further destroyed Nadal's confidence. Then Nadal had a crappy clay court pre-FO season - which included almost losing to a qualifier Lorenzi, losing a set to an injured Murray, and to ******** in Madrid.

By this time Djokovic had improved his game from IW/Miami. So Novak 2011> Novak 2010 and Nadal 2011 <<<<<< Nadal UsO 2010. What happens when one guy improves and the other declines? Exactly. Straight set beatdowns , and we saw them in Rome/Madrid.

In RG, Nadal got a reprieve coz he probably would have lost to Djoker, but didn't have to face him. He talks every day of being under pressure, and this is reflecting in his game, because it's been a long time since I've seen him play this kind of tennis and choke so much.

As your serve goes, so does your game. It's not a cliche. It's true for every player.
Forget about Wimbledon, from what I've seen in the clay season, Nadal won't win anything major this year, unless he improves his level massively from what he displayed in the F.O and the rest of the clay season..

Nadal's level is somewhat lower than before but you're still exaggerating,let's first wait and see how will Nadal play at Wimbledon.Heck he probably won't even have to play his best tennis to win there since Murray is prone to succumbing under heavy pressure(which he will be under at Wimbledon),Fed is prone to choking against Nadal and grass is Novak's worst surface.

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 02:21 PM
Wimbledon is shaping up quite nicely with all the smack talk from Rafa's Guardian Angels.

Should be a fascinating two weeks. :)

TennisFan3
06-12-2011, 02:23 PM
I was waiting on this. Yeah, Novak wouldn't have made an unforced error the entire match and would have been guaranteed to get all his first serves in. Say what you want, Rafa's retrieving in that match was better than it had been in months and months, and his forehand was ON. I/O and DTL were both beast. Im sure it had nothing to do with Rafa.

True. The BOLD part i.e the OFF-forehands are key to Nadal's game. With the I/O and DTL forehand, he can wrestle control of any neutral rally.

But the problem is, he only plays well when he is down and got nothing to lose. I mean in the 4th set, Nadal knew that he had lost the 3rd and the match was going to 5. So he had to raise his level. In the past, Nadal used to play like this all the time.

I mean watch the UsO final, Nadal vs Soderling ; Nadal vs Murray Wimb -- Rafa used to attack on every opportunity with his OFF forehand. One of the most underrated aspects of his game was how difficult it was to break him, and what a good front runner he was..

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:26 PM
True. The BOLD part i.e the OFF-forehands are key to Nadal's game. With the I/O and DTL forehand, he can wrestle control of any neutral rally.

But the problem is, he only plays well when he is down and got nothing to lose. I mean in the 4th set, Nadal knew that he had lost the 3rd and the match was going to 5. So he had to raise his level. In the past, Nadal used to play like this all the time.

I mean watch the UsO final, Nadal vs Soderling ; Nadal vs Murray Wimb -- Rafa used to attack on every opportunity with his OFF forehand. One of the most underrated aspects of his game was how difficult it was to break him, and what a good front runner he was..


The best thing that happened to him in the French was Uncle Toni telling him "it's ok, you won't win playing like this, just go home" LOL. Hopefully he brings it at Wimbledon. I think he will. I hope im right.

TennisFan3
06-12-2011, 02:27 PM
Nadal's level is somewhat lower than before but you're still exaggerating,let's first wait and see how will Nadal play at Wimbledon.Heck he probably won't even have to play his best tennis to win there since Murray is prone to succumbing under heavy pressure(which he will be under at Wimbledon),Fed is prone to choking against Nadal and grass is Novak's worst surface.

I don't understand this Novak is terrible on grass business. I must've been dreaming when he made 2 Semi-Finals. Also I must have been deluded watching Novak take it to Nadal (a Nadal at the peak of his powers) in Queens 2008.

Fact is: Novak knows how to play on grass. True his movement there is not as good as Fed/Nadal, but he has a MUCH BIGGER forehand now( did you see how he was crushing it against Delpo/Fed/Gasquet) - not to mention a SERVE which is better than anything in 2009/2010. So he WILL do well in Wimbledon.

My belief is that Fed is probably the only guy who could take out Djoker in Wimb. Djokovic is a bad matchup for Nadal ( regardless of the surface) and Rafa will need to lift his game big time to beat Djokovic..

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:28 PM
I was waiting on this. Yeah, Novak wouldn't have made an unforced error the entire match and would have been guaranteed to get all his first serves in. Say what you want, Rafa's retrieving in that match was better than it had been in months and months, and his forehand was ON. I/O and DTL were both beast. Im sure it had nothing to do with Rafa.

It had everything to do with Nadal as a presence,him being across the net is the reason Fed played a crap service game at 5-2 and a crappy tiebreak in 2nd set.It is to Nadal's credit that he got into Fed's head,he has earned that with all his past victories,Fed would not be making such routine errors if he was facing anyone else.

However Novak's confidence against Nadal leading into this FO was in a whole different place compared to Fed's and simply because of that the fact that Nadal beat Fed doesn't automatically mean he would have been able do the same to Novak.However don't take my word for it,most Nadal fans were thinking the same when they were rooting for Fed(a guy they normally can't stand)in SF.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:33 PM
It had everything to do with Nadal as a presence,him being across the net is the reason Fed played a crap service game at 5-2 and a crappy tiebreak in 2nd set.It is to Nadal's credit that he got into Fed's head,he has earned that with all his past victories,Fed would not be making such routine errors if he was facing anyone else.

However Novak's confidence against Nadal leading into this FO was in a whole different place compared to Fed's and simply because of that the fact that Nadal beat Fed doesn't automatically mean he would have been able do the same to Novak.However don't take my word for it,most Nadal fans were thinking the same when they were rooting for Fed(a guy they normally can't stand)in SF.

Myself included because Nadal was playing like he didn't care, or he wanted to go fish in Mallorca. But he brought a MUCH better level of tennis to the final, and I wouldn't have minded Novak being there had I known Rafa was going to actually play like he wanted the title. I don't think I've seen more of Rafa's forehands land ON the baseline since the first set of Doha vs Davy 2010. Hell, my backhand would be spraying errors too.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:34 PM
I don't understand this Novak is terrible on grass business. I must've been dreaming when he made 2 Semi-Finals. Also I must have been deluded watching Novak take it to Nadal (a Nadal at the peak of his powers) in Queens 2008.

Fact is: Novak knows how to play on grass. True his movement there is not as good as Fed/Nadal, but he has a MUCH BIGGER forehand now( did you see how he was crushing it against Delpo/Fed/Gasquet) - not to mention a SERVE which is better than anything in 2009/2010. So he WILL do well in Wimbledon.

My belief is that Fed is probably the only guy who could take out Djoker in Wimb. Djokovic is a bad matchup for Nadal ( regardless of the surface) and Rafa will need to lift his game big time to beat Djokovic..

I didn't say Novak can't play on grass,I said it's his worst surface(which it is) so he's less of a threat to anyone(not just Nadal)there compared to HC/clay.Fed is hardly the only one that can take Novak out on grass,Nadal and Murray can certainly do the same.Not to mention that we don't even know what Fed's level will be at Wimbledon this year,he played pretty good at FO last year(Soderling played an amazing match to take him out)yet come Wimbledon he was playing absolute crap.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:34 PM
Delete post.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:36 PM
Myself included because Nadal was playing like he didn't care, or he wanted to go fish in Mallorca. But he brought a MUCH better level of tennis to the final, and I wouldn't have minded Novak being there had I known Rafa was going to actually play like he wanted the title. I don't think I've seen more of Rafa's forehands land ON the baseline since the first set of Doha vs Davy 2010. Hell, my backhand would be spraying errors too.

He brought a much better level of tennis after Fed failed to clinch the 1st set,he was getting smacked around by old man until then,from that moment on the old record began to play again and Nadal's confidence slowly returned while Fed started to doubt again.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:38 PM
I guess we'll just see what happens in Wimby then. All this stuff is the past now.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:39 PM
I guess we'll just see what happens in Wimby then. All this stuff is the past now.

Should be interesting.I consider Nadal to be the 1st favourite for the title there by some margin,followed by Fed at 2nd place and then Novak/Murray at 3d.

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 02:42 PM
Should be interesting.I consider Nadal to be the 1st favourite for the title there by some margin,followed by Fed at 2nd place and then Novak/Murray at 3d.

Im hoping for a Fedal final. Their level should be about dead even with the way Roger is playing now. Been 3 years. Actually a Djokodal final would be nice too. LOTS and LOTS of drama and tension. I'd have to take a day off for that one.

powerangle
06-12-2011, 03:01 PM
Im hoping for a Fedal final. Their level should be about dead even with the way Roger is playing now. Been 3 years. Actually a Djokodal final would be nice too. LOTS and LOTS of drama and tension. I'd have to take a day off for that one.

Their physical levels at a Wimbledon final may be about even...or maybe even edge to Federer. Their mental levels won't be even. In the end that will be the most important.

powerangle
06-12-2011, 04:22 PM
(Djokovic played better in the 2010 US Open than he played in the 2011 RG SF vs Federer. Djokovic of 2010 USO would have been more likely to win RG SF. Djokovic has gotten worse in slams since this year's AO)

Not sure if I agree with that.

That US Open semi last year was a very up and down match. Djokovic may have looked better in that semi due to a relatively lackluster Fed. Djokovic fully deserved that win but Fed played nowhere near like he played in this year's RG SF.

Sharpshooter
06-13-2011, 12:46 AM
What level? The one which enabled him to break Federer at 5-2,a game in which Roger couldn't get a single 1st serve in? Or the level that enabled him to win the 2nd set tiebreak in which Fed made 4-5 unforced errors? Face it,Nadal could play like crap and Fed would still find a way to lose that FO final.

You have a good point but don't forget that Rafa also had some mental lapses as well which allowed Fed in. IMO they evened out.

First set, Rafa played pretty bad at the start it was obvious that he was nervous making a lot more UE's off the FH than usual which allowed Fed to get the lead in the first place.

In the second set, Rafa served for it twice. After the rain delay, Rafa was just pushing his first serve in and playing short, allowing Fed to break back and take it to a TB.

In the third set Rafa was ahead 4-2 and played the most conservative game in the tournamnet from him. He hit a lot of weak serves and short balls allowing Fed to take control of the rallies and break back.

So I think it evened up a little when you consider Fed's main lapses were when seving for the first set and in the TB.

Gorecki
06-13-2011, 02:16 AM
(Djokovic played better in the 2010 US Open than he played in the 2011 RG SF vs Federer. Djokovic of 2010 USO would have been more likely to win RG SF. Djokovic has gotten worse in slams since this year's AO)

[with a sample of one?]

vive le beau jeu !
06-13-2011, 02:31 AM
[with a sample of one?]
{haven't you ever heard of the "2nd bud's law" of supra-extrapolation from a single sample ?}

Gorecki
06-13-2011, 02:42 AM
(Sample of 7 best-of-5 matches is massive)
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/massive-tennis-racket.jpg

herm... Stats genius number 3... the elements of the population are ONE. ONE SLAM. you made the segmentation. not me! skipping Stats 101 did no good for you!

Sentinel
06-13-2011, 08:19 PM
(The unbeatable logic of *********...) [7 slams since this year's AO....:shock::shock::shock::shock: ]

((((psst ... anyone figured out the secret of the parentheses.))))

Lion King
06-13-2011, 09:26 PM
"He's only 25, he already has 10 slams, hence he will surely beat Federer's GS record."

Using past performance as a predictor of future results. I hope that guy doesn't play the stock market.

That's what I thought too. Nadal will have to play at this level for 4 more years to surpass Fed's record. Let's see if he can do it.

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 06:07 AM
{haven't you ever heard of the "2nd bud's law" of supra-extrapolation from a single sample ?}

You will have to learn tushar's law of tewton:every tenis balls have equal and opposite reaction..for ex-the harder you hit the balls faster it comes back..:)

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 07:18 AM
You have a good point but don't forget that Rafa also had some mental lapses as well which allowed Fed in. IMO they evened out.

First set, Rafa played pretty bad at the start it was obvious that he was nervous making a lot more UE's off the FH than usual which allowed Fed to get the lead in the first place.

In the second set, Rafa served for it twice. After the rain delay, Rafa was just pushing his first serve in and playing short, allowing Fed to break back and take it to a TB.

In the third set Rafa was ahead 4-2 and played the most conservative game in the tournamnet from him. He hit a lot of weak serves and short balls allowing Fed to take control of the rallies and break back.

So I think it evened up a little when you consider Fed's main lapses were when seving for the first set and in the TB.

Nadal losing the 3rd set or winning it didn't matter one bit. Having a 2-0 lead in sets meant he was as good as the FO champion.

Federer on the other hand would have a huge boost of confidence winning the first set 6-2 and serving first in the 2nd. Totally different scenarios and no they were NOT even in terms of mental lapses. Federer lost 7 games in a row FCOL, Nadal lost how many? 2?

ksbh
06-14-2011, 07:57 AM
(http://www.surfindia.com/celebrities/bollywood/images/sunny-deol.jpg)

Sharpshooter
06-14-2011, 08:31 AM
Nadal losing the 3rd set or winning it didn't matter one bit. Having a 2-0 lead in sets meant he was as good as the FO champion.

Federer on the other hand would have a huge boost of confidence winning the first set 6-2 and serving first in the 2nd. Totally different scenarios and no they were NOT even in terms of mental lapses. Federer lost 7 games in a row FCOL, Nadal lost how many? 2?

I like how you ignore the fact that Rafa practically handed Fed his first set lead to him in the first place. I just threw the third set in there as another example of Rafa's concentration lapses during that same final.

If Rafa didn't start out nervously as he obviously did, then Fed wouldn't have been up 5-2 in the first place.

BTW I thought you were banned why are you back?

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 09:12 AM
I like how you ignore the fact that Rafa practically handed Fed his first set lead to him in the first place. I just threw the third set in there as another example of Rafa's concentration lapses during that same final.

If Rafa didn't start out nervously as he obviously did, then Fed wouldn't have been up 5-2 in the first place.

BTW I thought you were banned why are you back?

Of course, Nadal going down 2-5 in the first set had nothing to do with Federer GOATing for the first 30 minutes.

Nadal nervous :D? Knowing that he was never going to lose the final? I'd sh** my pants if I was him :D

Oh and I'm back just to pi** you off :D

zagor
06-14-2011, 09:16 AM
You have a good point but don't forget that Rafa also had some mental lapses as well which allowed Fed in. IMO they evened out.

First set, Rafa played pretty bad at the start it was obvious that he was nervous making a lot more UE's off the FH than usual which allowed Fed to get the lead in the first place.

In the second set, Rafa served for it twice. After the rain delay, Rafa was just pushing his first serve in and playing short, allowing Fed to break back and take it to a TB.

In the third set Rafa was ahead 4-2 and played the most conservative game in the tournamnet from him. He hit a lot of weak serves and short balls allowing Fed to take control of the rallies and break back.

So I think it evened up a little when you consider Fed's main lapses were when seving for the first set and in the TB.

Oh sure I'm not denying Nadal was nervous as well and IMO played far from his best in the final but that has nothing to do with the fact that he was facing Federer but rather for some other unknown reason,maybe mental burnout? Who knows.

This year Nadal had quite often uncharacteristic lapses when he was in the lead like for example against Murray in SF in the 1st set(allowed Muzza to get 2 breaks back If I remember well)or Lorenzo in Rome(there was a game in which Nadal made 4 FH UFE,never saw that happen ever)heck even against Stepanek in Queens recently(the game in which Nadal was serving for the match in 2nd set was hilariously bad).

Fed on the other hand was rock solid both mentally and gamewise this tourney(heck he even beat the guy in the SF no one else could this year)and only showed mental weakness in the final against Nadal.

IMO Nadal seemed vulnerable at FO this year(for his standards of course)but played the guy he owns mentally(on the red clay atleast)in the final which is why I feel that Novak would have had a great shot in the final as he was riding on a wave of confidence against Nadal and Rafa himself wasn't playing well enough to just shut him out.

jackson vile
06-14-2011, 09:17 AM
Of course, Nadal going down 2-5 in the first set had nothing to do with Federer GOATing for the first 30 minutes.

Nadal nervous :D? Knowing that he was never going to lose the final? I'd sh** my pants if I was him :D

Oh and I'm back just to pi** you off :D



In reality Nadal looked his worst this clay season. This was Roger's best chance thus far to defeat Nadal at the FO. Nadal looked extremely vulnerable and was not playing his all out game that you expect from him. Reminds me of the time Soderling kicked his butt.

With that said, this was some of Roger's best play/tactics to date at the FO against Nadal. However, even with Roger making those improvements and Nadal looking rather subpar Federer still could not come up with the win.

8PAQ
06-14-2011, 09:18 AM
(The unbeatable logic of *********...) [7 slams since this year's AO....:shock::shock::shock::shock: ]

((((psst ... anyone figured out the secret of the parentheses.))))

I did in the Nadal's News thread. Here you go:


Ok now that explains everything. They let you out of the mental institution only if you promise to always wear a helmet. That`s why you think you need to put () around everything you say (kind of like a special helmet for words). Also, that`s why Nadal is the smartest person you ever met since mental patients are easily impressed. Thank you for finally clearing things up.

tennis_pro
06-14-2011, 09:36 AM
In reality Nadal looked his worst this clay season. This was Roger's best chance thus far to defeat Nadal at the FO. Nadal looked extremely vulnerable and was not playing his all out game that you expect from him. Reminds me of the time Soderling kicked his butt.

With that said, this was some of Roger's best play/tactics to date at the FO against Nadal. However, even with Roger making those improvements and Nadal looking rather subpar Federer still could not come up with the win.

Wilander said the absolute truth in 2006, Federer doesn't have the right attitude against Nadal, like it or not. As much as pounding his backhand is hurting him, it's his mental game that decreases heavily. Or maybe his mental game goes down because Nadal keeps pounding his backhand? Nobody knows, really. Either way I don't like Federer beat himself that often.

NadalAgassi
06-14-2011, 10:08 AM
(Djokovic played better in the 2010 US Open than he played in the 2011 RG SF vs Federer. Djokovic of 2010 USO would have been more likely to win RG SF. Djokovic has gotten worse in slams since this year's AO)

Federer played like crap in the U.S Open semis and still had 2 match points. If that is your reference point you should try a better one than that.

TheNatural
06-14-2011, 10:54 AM
Oh sure I'm not denying Nadal was nervous as well and IMO played far from his best in the final but that has nothing to do with the fact that he was facing Federer but rather for some other unknown reason,maybe mental burnout? Who knows.

This year Nadal had quite often uncharacteristic lapses when he was in the lead like for example against Murray in SF in the 1st set(allowed Muzza to get 2 breaks back If I remember well)or Lorenzo in Rome(there was a game in which Nadal made 4 FH UFE,never saw that happen ever)heck even against Stepanek in Queens recently(the game in which Nadal was serving for the match in 2nd set was hilariously bad).

Fed on the other hand was rock solid both mentally and gamewise this tourney(heck he even beat the guy in the SF no one else could this year)and only showed mental weakness in the final against Nadal.

IMO Nadal seemed vulnerable at FO this year(for his standards of course)but played the guy he owns mentally(on the red clay atleast)in the final which is why I feel that Novak would have had a great shot in the final as he was riding on a wave of confidence against Nadal and Rafa himself wasn't playing well enough to just shut him out.

Thats true, but I'm wandering, what happened to Novak v Fred? he was too predictable, no change of spin, pace or trajectory all match. He should add some variery to his game.He Just tried to hit through Fred Safin style.

TheTruth
06-14-2011, 01:15 PM
Thats true, but I'm wandering, what happened to Novak v Fred? he was too predictable, no change of spin, pace or trajectory all match. He should add some variery to his game.He Just tried to hit through Fred Safin style.

I found this interesting.

http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2011/06/06/nadal-thrives-when-going-gets-tough/

The overall picture is one very much consistent with the general reputation of Federer and Nadal. The familiar narrative is that Federer is an extraordinarily gifted tennis player, perhaps the most gifted ever, and very strong but not historically great at sheer competition. His very high level is high enough to win early in tournaments easily, and to win at the end, but less comfortably.

Nadal, on the other hand, is known for having great tennis skills but extraordinarily great competitiveness; he may well be the sportís fiercest competitor ever. Hence, given weak competition early in majors he sometimes struggles, but against the sportís best later on in tournaments, his best game emerges.

When the two have met in major finals, the contrast is heightened: Twice Federer has pulled through in close matches on his favorite surface, and six other times ó including four times on Nadalís favorite surface ó Nadal has upped his game and triumphed. This doesnít necessarily mean Nadal is the better player: Many times, particularly on Federerís best surfaces, Nadal has lost when vulnerable in the early rounds, and hasnít been around to face Federer in the finals.

But it does mean that when Nadal makes it to the latter stages of major tournaments, he is even more dangerous than his No. 1 ranking suggests. For this reason, in addition to Nadalís tactical advantages over Federer, Federerís best chance of winning his seventh Wimbledon title next month might be for Nadal to lose before he has to face him.

Comet Buster
06-14-2011, 01:27 PM
Thats true, but I'm wandering, what happened to Novak v Fred? he was too predictable, no change of spin, pace or trajectory all match. He should add some variery to his game.He Just tried to hit through Fred Safin style.

Variety to his game. Lol. Not just illiterate but also clueless. 'Wander' this: Federer played better. Deal with it or move on with your life.

TheNatural
06-14-2011, 02:48 PM
I found this interesting.

http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2011/06/06/nadal-thrives-when-going-gets-tough/

The overall picture is one very much consistent with the general reputation of Federer and Nadal. The familiar narrative is that Federer is an extraordinarily gifted tennis player, perhaps the most gifted ever, and very strong but not historically great at sheer competition. His very high level is high enough to win early in tournaments easily, and to win at the end, but less comfortably.

Nadal, on the other hand, is known for having great tennis skills but extraordinarily great competitiveness; he may well be the sportís fiercest competitor ever. Hence, given weak competition early in majors he sometimes struggles, but against the sportís best later on in tournaments, his best game emerges.

When the two have met in major finals, the contrast is heightened: Twice Federer has pulled through in close matches on his favorite surface, and six other times ó including four times on Nadalís favorite surface ó Nadal has upped his game and triumphed. This doesnít necessarily mean Nadal is the better player: Many times, particularly on Federerís best surfaces, Nadal has lost when vulnerable in the early rounds, and hasnít been around to face Federer in the finals.

But it does mean that when Nadal makes it to the latter stages of major tournaments, he is even more dangerous than his No. 1 ranking suggests. For this reason, in addition to Nadalís tactical advantages over Federer, Federerís best chance of winning his seventh Wimbledon title next month might be for Nadal to lose before he has to face him.

Thanks , interesting.I think average players lose hope faster when they play Federer because he ends points quicker, and gets lots of free points on serve so that builds more momentum qucker than Nadal's way of winning points, and fighting momentum feels like fighting an avalanche. Nadal makes them feel like he is suffocating them which makes them lose hope more slowly. Later in the tournament when good players play eachother its not quite as easy to build momentum and Nadal happens to particularly enjoy suffocating Federer.

I like the fact that Joker has raised his game as it lets us see what facets other players can add to their game to improve and counter him and if joker loses again to Fred next time, I wonder what else he will do differently .maybe some moon balls to the backhand?:lol:

TheNatural
06-14-2011, 02:48 PM
Variety to his game. Lol. Not just illiterate but also clueless. 'Wander' this: Federer played better. Deal with it or move on with your life.



No doubt you Baboon(did i spell that correctly?). That wasn't in contention. However thanks for your worthless contribution.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Xrtb6OK8t2c/TG_JY50LQ3I/AAAAAAAABFA/8OurnqtfF4I/s1600/Captain_Obvious.jpg

Comet Buster
06-14-2011, 02:51 PM
No doubt you Baboon(did i spell that correctly?). That wasn't in contention. However thanks for your worthless contribution.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Xrtb6OK8t2c/TG_JY50LQ3I/AAAAAAAABFA/8OurnqtfF4I/s1600/Captain_Obvious.jpg

Thanks. You could pick any of my 20-ish posts and most of them would be more insightful than any of yours. Go figure.

SStrikerR
06-14-2011, 02:51 PM
Federer is the greatest player of his generation. You can be the greatest player and still have a bad matchup against someone else. Rafa's game is the perfect foil to Federer's, and he's the only one who can do it as well as he does. Someone can try to emulate Rafa's game, but they won't do it as effectively as he does. See the thing is, Federer is a winner, and he does it a lot. His slam quarter/semi/final streaks are incredible, and show that he ALWAYS shows up and plays a high level. Rafa, on the other hand, could just as well be knocked out before then, and he will never reach Federer's consistency. Also, as brought up in the Lebron - Michael Jordan debate. Like MJ, Federer is a winner. Come back when Rafa has accomplished ANYWHERE near as much as Federer.

Also the article sucks. He lost to Novak Djokovic 4 times in a row. Unbeatable? Haha.

tlm
06-14-2011, 03:21 PM
Federer is the greatest player of his generation. You can be the greatest player and still have a bad matchup against someone else. Rafa's game is the perfect foil to Federer's, and he's the only one who can do it as well as he does. Someone can try to emulate Rafa's game, but they won't do it as effectively as he does. See the thing is, Federer is a winner, and he does it a lot. His slam quarter/semi/final streaks are incredible, and show that he ALWAYS shows up and plays a high level. Rafa, on the other hand, could just as well be knocked out before then, and he will never reach Federer's consistency. Also, as brought up in the Lebron - Michael Jordan debate. Like MJ, Federer is a winner. Come back when Rafa has accomplished ANYWHERE near as much as Federer.

Also the article sucks. He lost to Novak Djokovic 4 times in a row. Unbeatable? Haha.

Ya fed was a winner you mean, back in the day when he was facing the stiff competition of roddick hewitt and the rest of the chumps.

TheNatural
06-14-2011, 03:52 PM
Thanks. You could pick any of my 20-ish posts and most of them would be more insightful than any of yours. Go figure.

Like the one about roddick having the best technical volleys.:lol:

Pwned
06-14-2011, 04:03 PM
Like the one about roddick having the best technical volleys.:lol:

Probably as good as Andujar's?!?!

PSNELKE
06-14-2011, 04:08 PM
Oh sure I'm not denying Nadal was nervous as well and IMO played far from his best in the final but that has nothing to do with the fact that he was facing Federer but rather for some other unknown reason,maybe mental burnout? Who knows.

This year Nadal had quite often uncharacteristic lapses when he was in the lead like for example against Murray in SF in the 1st set(allowed Muzza to get 2 breaks back If I remember well)or Lorenzo in Rome(there was a game in which Nadal made 4 FH UFE,never saw that happen ever)heck even against Stepanek in Queens recently(the game in which Nadal was serving for the match in 2nd set was hilariously bad).

Fed on the other hand was rock solid both mentally and gamewise this tourney(heck he even beat the guy in the SF no one else could this year)and only showed mental weakness in the final against Nadal.

IMO Nadal seemed vulnerable at FO this year(for his standards of course)but played the guy he owns mentally(on the red clay atleast)in the final which is why I feel that Novak would have had a great shot in the final as he was riding on a wave of confidence against Nadal and Rafa himself wasn't playing well enough to just shut him out.

I have to agrre with zag, here.

TheTruth
06-14-2011, 04:14 PM
Federer is the greatest player of his generation. You can be the greatest player and still have a bad matchup against someone else. Rafa's game is the perfect foil to Federer's, and he's the only one who can do it as well as he does. Someone can try to emulate Rafa's game, but they won't do it as effectively as he does. See the thing is, Federer is a winner, and he does it a lot. His slam quarter/semi/final streaks are incredible, and show that he ALWAYS shows up and plays a high level. Rafa, on the other hand, could just as well be knocked out before then, and he will never reach Federer's consistency. Also, as brought up in the Lebron - Michael Jordan debate. Like MJ, Federer is a winner. Come back when Rafa has accomplished ANYWHERE near as much as Federer.

Also the article sucks. He lost to Novak Djokovic 4 times in a row. Unbeatable? Haha.

You didn't like the article? I thought it was spot on.

Fed lost to Djoker three times in a row, didn't he? One less loss, that's only 25% in 2011. Not exactly what you would call a landslide. If you were giving grades, both of them flunked :(. 25% is also an F.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-14-2011, 04:25 PM
Nadal, on the other hand, is known for having great tennis skills but extraordinarily great competitiveness; he may well be the sport’s fiercest competitor ever. Hence, given weak competition early in majors he sometimes struggles


How does HENCE he can lose with weak competition early in majors follow from the previous two sentences stating Nadal has great tennis skills and the best competitiveness?

jm1980
04-03-2012, 03:35 PM
LOL. Nadal has never lost to Djokovic in a major yet, has 10 majors to Djokovic's 2, and leads the head-to-head by 16-11. Djokovic has done more damage to Federer than Nadal, as he's beaten Federer 3 times in majors, twice on the way to his Australian Open victories.

Not really. In the biggest stage Nadal has owned Djokovic. Nadal continues to own Federer in the biggest stage as usual. So it is again not comparible.

In how many majors has Nadal beaten Djokovic?

5-0 in favor of Nadal :)

3 at RG
1 at Wimbledon
1 at the USO

He nearly has a Djoker slam!

http://i.imgur.com/6fZvx.gif

OddJack
04-03-2012, 03:41 PM
This article is a Foster-Wallace wanna be.

Not original.

OddJack
04-03-2012, 03:43 PM
Haha..

Nadal "blushes"?? He never blushes. He just raises his left eyebrow and goofs it off.
I stopped reading right there. BS

Legend of Borg
04-03-2012, 03:55 PM
No one's unbeatable.

Looks like Rafa wasn't the only one that got a reality check in the last year.

Someone should call the suicide watch to keep an eye on good ole Joe Posnanski (Polish immigrant?).

kiki
04-03-2012, 04:04 PM
Nadal will never know how good or not he is until he plays a five set match against 73 yrs old Rod Laver, on a very slow clay court...

Mustard
04-03-2012, 05:04 PM
http://i.imgur.com/6fZvx.gif

Ah, I see. Using hindsight.

Cup8489
04-03-2012, 05:07 PM
You didn't like the article? I thought it was spot on.

Fed lost to Djoker three times in a row, didn't he? One less loss, that's only 25% in 2011. Not exactly what you would call a landslide. If you were giving grades, both of them flunked :(. 25% is also an F.

But one win in 5 meetings is still infinitely better than 0 wins in 7 (and counting) meetings

:oops:

Agassifan
04-03-2012, 08:20 PM
In how many majors has Nadal beaten Djokovic?

5-0 in favor of Nadal :)

3 at RG
1 at Wimbledon
1 at the USO

He nearly has a Djoker slam!

OMG LOL LOL LOL

purge
04-03-2012, 09:13 PM
OMG LOL LOL LOL
ah so this is where the inspiration for that rafa slam came from