PDA

View Full Version : Raonic on playing Federer vs playing Nadal


Marius_Hancu
03-14-2012, 10:47 AM
---
Q. You played Nadal twice; you played now Federer. For you, who is the tougher opponent?

MILOS RAONIC: I think it's two different things. I think against Nadal, I feel like I just was able to sort of get more into the match. I feel like if Federer plays well he can just blow you out quicker.

I think Nadal might be tougher to close out just because of how adamant he is and how much he perseveres through things. Against Rafa, I feel like I had it in my hands. I had a few more opportunities in my hands that I didn't execute.

Against Federer, I feel like [that even] if you did the things right he could take it away from you pretty quickly.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=78312
---

His matches against Nadal:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=R975&oId=N409

DjokovicForTheWin
03-14-2012, 10:58 AM
HE's basically just reiterating what both Fed and Nadal have already said and what the staunch ***** on this forum deny.

vive le beau jeu !
03-14-2012, 11:20 AM
---
Q. You played Nadal twice; you played now Federer. For you, who is the tougher opponent?

MILOS RAONIC: I think it's two different things. I think against Nadal, I feel like I just was able to sort of get more into the match. I feel like if Federer plays well he can just blow you out quicker.

I think Nadal might be tougher to close out just because of how adamant he is and how much he perseveres through things. Against Rafa, I feel like I had it in my hands. I had a few more opportunities in my hands that I didn't execute.

Against Federer, I feel like [that even] if you did the things right he could take it away from you pretty quickly.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=78312
---

His matches against Nadal:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=R975&oId=N409
now the question is... which part of this quote will the golden beef worshippers take out of context to decide of milos' destiny ?

- the red one ?... awarding him the coveted status of fellow faithful ?
- or the blue one ?... burning him at stake for this intolerable lack of respect towards the almighty rusty peak injured golden bull ?

place your bet...

Gaudio2004
03-14-2012, 11:20 AM
What he says about Nadal is logical; Nadal is a reactive baseliner, aka a "modern" baseliner (http://backhanddropshot.wordpress.com/2010/12/04/a-new-breed-of-tennis-player-the-modern-baseliner/), and (at least in the early rounds of tournaments and sometimes all through out!) reacts rather than ignites with game-style. Whatever you try - Nadal will respond to it, it "feels" like the match is in your hands because it is you who is creating, however as nearly all players find out, just because you are the one who is creating and igniting the match, it does not mean you will be the one to win it!

Federer has a different style - a pro-active style that takes time away from anyone and "sucks" any player into reacting against Federer.

A good example is to watch Raonic vs Berlocq at IW 2012 and then his next match (Raonic vs Federer), Raonic looks a different player when returning!

DjokovicForTheWin
03-14-2012, 11:27 AM
But Raonic also kinda contradicted himself:

1) Q. What was it like being in the rallies with him compared to other guys you've played once the rallies start?

A. He hits the ball like the other guys

2) Q. Did you learn anything in particular from Federer on the other end?

A. I think the best way to describe it is he has that efficiency‑ I'm not talking about with energy and everything, just with the way he hits the ball‑ he doesn't only hit the ball hard, but he hits it with an amount of spin that makes the ball go away from you even more.

keithfival
03-14-2012, 11:55 AM
Yes, he had it in his hands even though he didn't win a set in 2 matches. I was sure I was going to win that game of three card monte on the street the other night too!

marcub
03-14-2012, 12:02 PM
---
Q. You played Nadal twice; you played now Federer. For you, who is the tougher opponent?

MILOS RAONIC: I think it's two different things. I think against Nadal, I feel like I just was able to sort of get more into the match. I feel like if Federer plays well he can just blow you out quicker.

I think Nadal might be tougher to close out just because of how adamant he is and how much he perseveres through things. Against Rafa, I feel like I had it in my hands. I had a few more opportunities in my hands that I didn't execute.

Against Federer, I feel like [that even] if you did the things right he could take it away from you pretty quickly.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=78312
---

His matches against Nadal:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=R975&oId=N409

Milos is a real smart kid and I like what he's saying.

It is however also a question of matchup. While you can't really blow Fed off the court with power (he takes the ball really early - I was amazed last night how he was glued to the baseline even on Milos's first serve) - Ralph is relatively poor against big hitters and I think it has to do with his positioning far behind the baseline.

merlinpinpin
03-14-2012, 12:08 PM
Yes, he had it in his hands even though he didn't win a set in 2 matches. I was sure I was going to win that game of three card monte on the street the other night too!

What's interesting when you look at their matches' stats (except for the fact that Raonic had a pretty poor first serve % on the first one) is the break-point conversion:

Nadal: 4 out of 4 (both matches combined)
Raonic: 0 out of 5

Now Milos knows what he has to work on against Rafa... ;)

purge
03-14-2012, 12:21 PM
most people who have played them both say similar things in that regard. there seems to be consesnus among those who should know about it

jackson vile
03-14-2012, 12:24 PM
There you have it folks, another guy that is in control of the match and chooses to lose again Nadal. :)

marcub
03-14-2012, 12:31 PM
There you have it folks, another guy that is in control of the match and chooses to lose again Nadal. :)

Enjoy it while it lasts. Won't be long before the tide changes.

jackson vile
03-14-2012, 03:11 PM
Enjoy it while it lasts. Won't be long before the tide changes.

You mean that they will choose to start winning against him?

Cup8489
03-14-2012, 03:16 PM
There you have it folks, another guy that is in control of the match and chooses to lose again Nadal. :)

Ironic coming from you considering who your hero is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SdfhhYJsJ8

LOL.

SLD76
03-14-2012, 03:24 PM
Ironic coming from you considering who your hero is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SdfhhYJsJ8

LOL.

ROFL! I was wondering when someone was gonna compare what Raonic said about Rafa with what Djoker said after the one match with Rafa at RG......

I thinki someone up thread has it right, maybe because Rafa is defensive minded and reactive, the other player 'feels' as if the match is in their hands, and its a matter of them making shots...meanwhile they fall into Rafa's web...

billnepill
03-14-2012, 03:26 PM
You mean that they will choose to start winning against him?

I think nadal is in a lot more control these days, but previously with his adapted clay court tennis on hard courts he was really not in control of the matches. If someone went out there playing amazing aggressive tennis nadal simply gave up. Federer in his better years has always been more equipped to deal with players on his own terms than nadal ever was. Nadal was regularly pushed by players which federer just torn apart.

Things have changed. Nadal is controlling the matches a lot better with more aggressive tennis now. Maybe only on faster surfaces he is a bit exposed

christinamaniac7
03-14-2012, 03:36 PM
There you have it folks, another guy that is in control of the match and chooses to lose again Nadal. :)

Well said!! :shock: Will they ever change their mind to beat rafa while controlling matches??!:-?

Bobby Jr
03-14-2012, 03:37 PM
HE's basically just reiterating what both Fed and Nadal have already said and what the staunch ***** on this forum deny.
Yep.

Raonic is right. Nadal is more of a supreme grinder. No matter how many times he beats you players can get into lots of rallys - that alone makes people think they've got a chance, even if they really don't. Federer on the other hand can take that away from you, as he showed against Raonic yesterday. Any time Federer got a good swing on a forehand the rally pretty much went his way regardless of Raonic.

That sort of play makes opponents feel more helpless than playing against someone like Nadal.

jackson vile
03-14-2012, 03:39 PM
I think nadal is in a lot more control these days, but previously with his adapted clay court tennis on hard courts he was really not in control of the matches. If someone went out there playing amazing aggressive tennis nadal simply gave up. Federer in his better years has always been more equipped to deal with players on his own terms than nadal ever was. Nadal was regularly pushed by players which federer just torn apart.

Things have changed. Nadal is controlling the matches a lot better with more aggressive tennis now. Maybe only on faster surfaces he is a bit exposed

1) you can't really compare Nadal's "lesser" years with Federer "better" years

2) offense does not = control, many of the better athletes and teams end up having the most superior defense rather than offense.

3) I really don't think anyone is in control of the match when two high levels players are fighting. They are simply reacting to one another, control = you are the one in control = you decide the out come to your desire because you hold all the power.

billnepill
03-14-2012, 03:41 PM
Ironic coming from you considering who your hero is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SdfhhYJsJ8

LOL.

Hehe good point

I think jvile might have forgotten what happened with yet another guy who said the same thing :)

SLD76
03-14-2012, 03:42 PM
1) you can't really compare Nadal's "lesser" years with Federer "better" years

2) offense does not = control, many of the better athletes and teams end up having the most superior defense rather than offense.

3) I really don't think anyone is in control of the match when two high levels players are fighting. They are simply reacting to one another, control = you are the one in control = you decide the out come to your desire because you hold all the power.


.....what?

ever heard of the term the best defense is a good offense? meaning aggression=control

...what?

do you think before you type?

I guess Murray wasnt in 'control' when he whipped djoker a few weeks ago.

jackson vile
03-14-2012, 03:42 PM
conĚtrol (kn-trl)
tr.v. conĚtrolled, conĚtrolĚling, conĚtrols
1. To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct.

That is what control is folks, the person in control, the majority of the time, is going to get their way.

SLD76
03-14-2012, 03:43 PM
conĚtrol (kn-trl)
tr.v. conĚtrolled, conĚtrolĚling, conĚtrols
1. To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct.

That is what control is folks, the person in control, the majority of the time, is going to get their way.

I guess no one ever 'controlled' a match by your ...i guess, definition.

jackson vile
03-14-2012, 03:50 PM
I guess no one ever 'controlled' a match by your ...i guess, definition.

I could agree if they are totally dominating the other player then they would be in control. Kinda like when Nole was handing out bagels and bread sticks last year.

billnepill
03-14-2012, 03:59 PM
1) you can't really compare Nadal's "lesser" years with Federer "better" years yes, that would be unfair. What I am saying is that nadal has improved in that regard - he is a lot more likely to control matches these days but federer was better in doing that during his dominance

2) offense does not = control, many of the better athletes and teams end up having the most superior defense rather than offense. -I don't know what we are talking about here - football? Not tennis. The greatest players in the history are offensive players, apart from maybe Borg but he is largely considered 4th after Laver, Sampras and Federer

3) I really don't think anyone is in control of the match when two high levels players are fighting. They are simply reacting to one another, control = you are the one in control = you decide the out come to your desire because you hold all the power - you might have a point here but with nadal's defensive style it is possible that someone goes out there blasting winners and nadal would just keep trying to retrieve and depend on the other player not to be able to do his shots. Nadal would win in very high majority of cases but remember he was once vulnerable to big hitter namely because of the above ].

10 characters

marcub
03-14-2012, 04:00 PM
You mean that they will choose to start winning against him?

Yep... kinda like your idol made his choice about a year ago. It's a matter of months now before Ralph goes down to the young guns.

Cup8489
03-14-2012, 04:06 PM
There you have it folks, another guy that is in control of the match and chooses to lose again Nadal. :)

1) you can't really compare Nadal's "lesser" years with Federer "better" years

2) offense does not = control, many of the better athletes and teams end up having the most superior defense rather than offense.

3) I really don't think anyone is in control of the match when two high levels players are fighting. They are simply reacting to one another, control = you are the one in control = you decide the out come to your desire because you hold all the power.


conĚtrol (kn-trl)
tr.v. conĚtrolled, conĚtrolĚling, conĚtrols
1. To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct.

That is what control is folks, the person in control, the majority of the time, is going to get their way.

I could agree if they are totally dominating the other player then they would be in control. Kinda like when Nole was handing out bagels and bread sticks last year.

Ironic coming from you considering who your hero is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SdfhhYJsJ8

LOL.

LOLVILLE WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS PRESS CONFERENCE OF DJOKOVIC'S?

Hmm...

Sentinel
03-14-2012, 08:00 PM
He's basically saying what we all know but no one dares say ...
... that Nadal is the greatest ever. Federer sucks.


10 vamos.

nadalwon2012
03-14-2012, 08:03 PM
In other words, Federer is error-prone, Nadal is not. We already knew that.

merlinpinpin
03-15-2012, 12:00 AM
In other words, Federer is error-prone, Nadal is not. We already knew that.

Nope. In other words, Nadal leaves the initiative to you (and generally gives you the rope to hang yourself with, physically speaking, as his main stategy is to tire out the opponent and make him miss his shots) while Federer takes it away from you. Which is why Djokovic, who doesn't fear Nadal physically anymore, is not afraid to hang with him and beat him at his own game... and why he's vulnerable to an inspired Federer.

But of course, everyone already knew that. ;)

Russeljones
03-15-2012, 12:16 AM
HE's basically just reiterating what both Fed and Nadal have already said and what the staunch ***** on this forum deny.

That every match Federer every plays is on his racquet and his form on the day decides the outcome.

Feather
03-15-2012, 02:14 AM
Yep.

Raonic is right. Nadal is more of a supreme grinder. No matter how many times he beats you players can get into lots of rallys - that alone makes people think they've got a chance, even if they really don't. Federer on the other hand can take that away from you, as he showed against Raonic yesterday. Any time Federer got a good swing on a forehand the rally pretty much went his way regardless of Raonic.

That sort of play makes opponents feel more helpless than playing against someone like Nadal.

I concur :)

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 02:43 AM
Nadal defeated Raonic 6-4 6-4 (2010, hardcourt, Tokyo)

Nadal defeated Raonic 7-5 6-3 (2011, hardcourt, Tokyo)

:lol: Nadal owns the crap out of Raonichump.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 02:49 AM
I wonder if Federer has the ability to beat Raonic in straight sets.

macca1983
03-15-2012, 04:25 AM
Another player that is so kind to Nadal that he decides to lose the match agains him.

Seems to be a lot of guys out there that do that - of course Federer is the most generous of them all :)

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 05:06 AM
Another player that is so kind to Nadal that he decides to lose the match agains him.

Seems to be a lot of guys out there that do that - of course Federer is the most generous of them all :)

Raonic is probably a federer fan, so I can see why he might suck up a bit in this case. Nadal comprehensively owns Raonic, while federer looked rather tame and beatable vs Raonic. Raonic really struggles to get on top of Nadal from the baseline. It's like "hit an ace/freak winner or bust". It's like Wayne Arthurs vs Andre Agassi.

marcub
03-15-2012, 05:59 AM
In other words, Federer is error-prone, Nadal is not. We already knew that.

That's probably your only accurate statement in this thread.

It's called the percentage game. Ralph plays by the book, 3 feet above the net, with crazy ping-pong spin like his tio taught him. Huge margin for error. Not a lot of guts in playing like that. Not a lot of winners either.

That's why Ralph's game is not attractive to watch. No, not even to the girlies who drool after him on this board. They don't watch his game anyway :).

Fed's game is all about winners. And only whoever doesn't try doesn't make mistakes.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:18 AM
The most accurate post in his thread is-

Nadal defeated Raonic 6-4 6-4 (2010, hardcourt, Tokyo)

Nadal defeated Raonic 7-5 6-3 (2011, hardcourt, Tokyo)

:lol: Nadal owns the crap out of Raonichump.

TheFifthSet
03-15-2012, 06:23 AM
Nadal defeated Raonic 6-4 6-4 (2010, hardcourt, Tokyo)

Nadal defeated Raonic 7-5 6-3 (2011, hardcourt, Tokyo)

:lol: Nadal owns the crap out of Raonichump.

He's a chump for expressing his opinion? :s And for being a top 25 player in the world?

Then what are you? He's clearly more successful than you, so you must be less than a chump. Which is a pretty sad proposition.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:30 AM
He's a chump for expressing his opinion? :s And for being a top 25 player in the world?

Then what are you? He's clearly more successful than you, so you must be less than a chump. Which is a pretty sad proposition.

I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

aphex
03-15-2012, 06:31 AM
That's probably your only accurate statement in this thread.

It's called the percentage game. Ralph plays by the book, 3 feet above the net, with crazy ping-pong spin like his tio taught him. Huge margin for error. Not a lot of guts in playing like that. Not a lot of winners either.

That's why Ralph's game is not attractive to watch. No, not even to the girlies who drool after him on this board. They don't watch his game anyway :).

Fed's game is all about winners. And only whoever doesn't try doesn't make mistakes.

They always start watching his matches but the temptation of delicious cake is just too strong and after 10 minutes they're back in the kitchen gulping down cake with tears rolling down their eyes...

TheFifthSet
03-15-2012, 06:31 AM
I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

u probs do mang, u probs do

marcub
03-15-2012, 06:34 AM
The most accurate post in his thread is-

Kinda like Davy owns Ralph you mean? So you're one of'em h2h nuts.

Enjoy Ralph's sucess while it still lasts, he's on his home stretch now. By the time you get to shave for the first time the likes of Raonic will sweep the court with Ralph.

FlashFlare11
03-15-2012, 06:34 AM
I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

That post, coupled with your signature, probably lost you any credibility you had laft.

marcub
03-15-2012, 06:36 AM
The most accurate post in his thread is-

I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

:lol: thanks for helping start my day with a good laugh

aphex
03-15-2012, 06:36 AM
I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

Oh, you know Raonic personally?

That's great!

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:37 AM
That post, coupled with your signature, probably lost you any credibility you had laft.

You never had any credibility, so your judgmental post means zero to me.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:38 AM
Oh, you know Raonic personally?

That's great!

Just saying, I know for a fact he hasn't got the academic qualifications to match me in certain areas.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 06:38 AM
Nadal defeated Raonic 6-4 6-4 (2010, hardcourt, Tokyo)

Nadal defeated Raonic 7-5 6-3 (2011, hardcourt, Tokyo)

:lol: Nadal owns the crap out of Raonichump.

Doesn't that mean Davydenko owns the crap out of Nadal?

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:39 AM
Kinda like Davy owns Ralph you mean? So you're one of'em h2h nuts.

Enjoy Ralph's sucess while it still lasts, he's on his home stretch now. By the time you get to shave for the first time the likes of Raonic will sweep the court with Ralph.

Wrong. Davy leads Nadal 6-4. Nadal leads Raonic 2-0 and Roanic hasn't even won a set!

Don't get too excited. You probably felt this way in 2009, and a year later Nadal was going for The Rafa Slam. Don't be shocked if Nadal is going for The Rafa Slam in 2013 AO.

FlashFlare11
03-15-2012, 06:41 AM
You never had any credibility, so your judgmental post means zero to me.

Right, because I'm called a troll and flamed for every post I make. Sure...

aphex
03-15-2012, 06:41 AM
Just saying, I know for a fact he hasn't got the academic qualifications to match me in certain areas.

I'm just being condescending.

That means I talk down to you.

marcub
03-15-2012, 06:41 AM
Just saying, I know for a fact he hasn't got the academic qualifications to match me in certain areas.

:lol: I'm sure Milos would be totally devastated to hear that!

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:41 AM
Doesn't that mean Davydenko owns the crap out of Nadal?

Wrong. Davy leads Nadal 6-4. Nadal leads Raonic 2-0 and Roanic hasn't even won a set!

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:42 AM
Right, because I'm called a troll and flamed for every post I make. Sure...

The more I get flamed, the more I will own all the flamers when Nadal regains the throne. A lot of posters here have put all their eggs in the Djokovic basket.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 06:44 AM
Wrong. Davy leads Nadal 6-4. Nadal leads Raonic 2-0 and Roanic hasn't even won a set!

what does 6-4=? And what does 2-0=?

marcub
03-15-2012, 06:44 AM
Wrong. Davy leads Nadal 6-4. Nadal leads Raonic 2-0 and Roanic hasn't even won a set!

Don't get too excited. You probably felt this way in 2009, and a year later Nadal was going for The Rafa Slam. Don't be shocked if Nadal is going for The Rafa Slam in 2013 AO.

Yep, on the old boys tour.

It's relative who owns whom. In a few months you'll be weeping at the mere sight of Ralph :)

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:45 AM
what does 6-4=? And what does 2-0=?

6-4 is nothing but a close h2h. 2-0 means Raonic has NEVER beaten Nadal. In addition to that, Roanic has NEVER won a set.

tennis_pro
03-15-2012, 06:45 AM
The more I get flamed, the more I will own all the flamers when Nadal regains the throne. A lot of posters here have put all their eggs in the Djokovic basket.

or the more you will humiliate yourself if he doesn't

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 06:48 AM
or the more you will humiliate yourself if he doesn't

No danger of that :lol:

FlashFlare11
03-15-2012, 06:53 AM
No danger of that :lol:

What makes you so sure? Why do you chastise us for being sure that Djokovic will win their next match and then guarantee us that Nadal will win?

Nadal didn't totally close the gap (as you preach) in Australia. He narrowed it, but he didn't completely close it, otherwise, he woudve won. And had that match been a best of 3 sets match, Nadal wouldve lost sooner.

So, why are you so sure Nadal will win their next match?

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 07:05 AM
What makes you so sure? Why do you chastise us for being sure that Djokovic will win their next match and then guarantee us that Nadal will win?

Nadal didn't totally close the gap (as you preach) in Australia. He narrowed it, but he didn't completely close it, otherwise, he woudve won. And had that match been a best of 3 sets match, Nadal wouldve lost sooner.

So, why are you so sure Nadal will win their next match?

I just state my opinion. If you feel chastised, that is your problem. I never said I 'know the future', just an opinion. In my opinion, Nadal has closed the gap by matching Djokovic on Djokovic's best slam surface, and Nadal will only close the gap more. A simple matter of momentum.

sdont
03-15-2012, 07:10 AM
I only called him a chump because his 0 of 4 in sets played vs Nadal. Raonic is Nadal's chump. I'm far better than Raonic at all kinds of things. I bet I have more talents than him.

Nadal would be proud. Humbleness at its finest. :lol:

FlashFlare11
03-15-2012, 07:13 AM
I just state my opinion. If you feel chastised, that is your problem. I never said I 'know the future', just an opinion. In my opinion, Nadal has closed the gap by matching Djokovic on Djokovic's best slam surface, and Nadal will only close the gap more. A simple matter of momentum.

Well, most of your posts basically ignore the possibility Djokovic will win their next match (though I agree that counting Nadal out is wrong too).

For me, a change of momentum would a close victory, followed by more convincing wins. Nadal didn't win, so no matter how close he came, the momentum is still with Novak.

marcub
03-15-2012, 07:19 AM
I just state my opinion. If you feel chastised, that is your problem. I never said I 'know the future', just an opinion. In my opinion, Nadal has closed the gap by matching Djokovic on Djokovic's best slam surface, and Nadal will only close the gap more. A simple matter of momentum.

Ha?! Has matched Djoker... has closed the gap... but willl close it more :lol:

Son, logic is surely not your forte among your academic credentials that Milos would be so jealous of.

And no, he hasn't matched or narrowed the gap with Djoker. It's Djoker's level that went down slightly.

monfed
03-15-2012, 07:22 AM
Nadal struggles BADLY to hold on to his service games against Djokovic. Even serving at 84% FS in Wimby, he still couldn't win that set. Says it all.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 07:22 AM
6-4 is nothing but a close h2h. 2-0 means Raonic has NEVER beaten Nadal. In addition to that, Roanic has NEVER won a set.

How is 6-4=0? Where did you go to school? Or did you????

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 07:24 AM
The h2h of 6-4 means 'nothing'. Get it? It's a close h2h, it means nothing.

A h2h of 2-0 whereas means 'something'. It means that Raonic has never beaten Nadal. Get it? Never even won a set.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 07:27 AM
The h2h of 6-4 means 'nothing'. Get it? It's a close h2h, it means nothing.

A h2h of 2-0 whereas means 'something'. It means that Raonic has never beaten Nadal. Get it? Never even won a set.

That's not true, both 6-4 and 2-0 mean something. Davydenko has won more sets than Nadal.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 07:28 AM
That's not true, both 6-4 and 2-0 mean something. Davydenko has won more sets than Nadal.

Raonic has won ZERO sets. ZERO matches. There is a finality about ZERO. It means Raonic has proven absolutely nothing. Hasn't even proven that he 'can' beat Nadal.

Doesn't compare to 6-4 h2h.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 07:30 AM
Raonic has won ZERO sets. ZERO matches. There is a finality about ZERO. It means Raonic has proven absolutely nothing. Hasn't even proven that he 'can' beat Nadal.

Doesn't compare to 6-4 h2h.

Nadal has only won 2 more matches than Davy, the name number he has won over Raonic. It compares very well to 6-4.

monfed
03-15-2012, 07:32 AM
Raonic has won ZERO sets. ZERO matches. There is a finality about ZERO.

Doesn't compare to 6-4 h2h.

Actually Davydenko is 6-1 against Nadal on HC. That's just 1 victory for Nadal. You keep saying "What if Nadal beats Djokovic".. Well "what if Raonic beats Nadal in the next 5-6 meetings?"

Nadal beating Davy on clay is irrelevant anyway, Davy sucks on clay and Nadal beats everyone other than Djokovic on clay.

nadalwon2012
03-15-2012, 07:32 AM
Nadal has only won 2 more matches than Davy, the name number he has won over Raonic. It compares very well to 6-4.

ZERO doesn't compare to anything. ZERO means unproven.

sonicare
03-15-2012, 07:33 AM
I just state my opinion. If you feel chastised, that is your problem. I never said I 'know the future', just an opinion. In my opinion, Nadal has closed the gap by matching Djokovic on Djokovic's best slam surface, and Nadal will only close the gap more. A simple matter of momentum.

Listen troller....

the simple matter of momentum says 7-0.

monfed
03-15-2012, 07:35 AM
The most important thing for me is Djokovic can beat Nadal even if he plays subpar(proven clearly by AO 2012). 99% of the tour can't. That's the smoking gun.

sonicare
03-15-2012, 07:37 AM
The h2h of 6-4 means 'nothing'. Get it? It's a close h2h, it means nothing.

A h2h of 2-0 whereas means 'something'. It means that Raonic has never beaten Nadal. Get it? Never even won a set.

and what does a h2h of 0-7 against your biggest rival over the last 15 months across all surfaces in finals of majors and masters 1000 mean?

kragster
03-15-2012, 07:37 AM
The result of 6-4 is closer than the result of 2-0 since one is 60% win rate and one is a 100% win rate. However, the statistical validity of 6-4 is higher than that of 2-0 since 6-4 is a sample size of 10 matches and 2-0 is a sample size of only 2 matches.

Overall, I would rate them equally good/bad predictions of what would happen in a match.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 07:53 AM
ZERO doesn't compare to anything. ZERO means unproven.

ZERO is undefined. If Raonic took ZERO games off of Nadal then you might have a point. But he took plenty. It's only a matter of time before Raonic trounces Nadal. He's a lot younger

Cup8489
03-15-2012, 08:02 AM
ZERO doesn't compare to anything. ZERO means unproven.

You're such a nincompoop nadallost2012! LOL.

I'm surprised they let you off the ban when you clearly have nothing but crap in your posts and just spam to no end.

I notice LOLville never replied to my post 3 pages back.

kragster
03-15-2012, 08:24 AM
I think Raonic will be Tsonga like in that he will always be a threat but fall short of the finish line, at least in the next 2 years while the top 4 are still dominant. Too soon to tell obviously but I don't see enough to suggest that he will be better than a del potro. Of course DP himself is due a comeback.

kaleidoskope
03-15-2012, 08:30 AM
That 6-4=0 & 2-0 conversation thingy is going to my "epic TT moments" list, I can tell you that... :D

Clarky21
03-15-2012, 09:05 AM
Djokovic already lost his advantage...Nadal will go on to beat him in every matches they will play from now on.


Oh,look ********* has yet another account. :lol:

Hitman
03-15-2012, 09:06 AM
Before Nadal closed the gap.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/001/451/514/124802391_crop_650x440.jpg?1319063060

This is what happened after Nadal closed the gap.

http://www.10sworld.com/tennis/sites/default/files/images/images/rafael-nadal-vs-novak-djokovic-2012-australian-open-trophy-ceremony.bigsplash.jpg

The gap has closed, as the dramatic difference in the two pictures indicate.

(Sorry for the trolling)

SLD76
03-15-2012, 09:09 AM
Before Nadal closed the gap.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/001/451/514/124802391_crop_650x440.jpg?1319063060

This is what happened after Nadal closed the gap.

http://www.10sworld.com/tennis/sites/default/files/images/images/rafael-nadal-vs-novak-djokovic-2012-australian-open-trophy-ceremony.bigsplash.jpg

The gap has closed, as the dramatic difference in the two pictures indicate.

(Sorry for the trolling)


cue TrolleyZillaWonKing posting another pic of the AO 2009 ceremony in 3...2...1....

mattennis
03-15-2012, 09:13 AM
People have too much spare time here, given that they even answer trollzillas's posts.

Don't you all see that he/she is a Nadal hater trolling in disguise?

At least Clarky is genuine to me, and makes me laugh a lot.

monfed
03-15-2012, 09:15 AM
Oh,look ********* has yet another account. :lol:

Yet,the mods allow it. Puzzling.

Clarky21
03-15-2012, 09:18 AM
People have too much spare time here, given that they even answer trollzillas's posts.

Don't you all see that he/she is a Nadal hater trolling in disguise?

At least Clarky is genuine to me, and makes me laugh a lot.


Thanks for the shout-out. Lol. And I agree with you that ********* and his multiple personalities is not a Nadal fan at all. Same as Trollforthewin is really a Fed fan masquerading as a **** fan.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 09:24 AM
Thanks for the shout-out. Lol. And I agree with you that ********* and his multiple personalities is not a Nadal fan at all. Same as Trollforthewin is really a Fed fan masquerading as a **** fan.

LOL, someone sure is obsessed with me :)

mattennis
03-15-2012, 09:25 AM
Exactly, trollzilla and trolling for the win are two faces of the same coin.

They differ in style and strategy, but their sole purpose is to ridicule Nadal.

They could be even the same person.

Clarky21
03-15-2012, 09:27 AM
Exactly, trollzilla and trolling for the win are two faces of the same coin.

They differ in style and strategy, but their sole purpose is to ridicule Nadal.

They could be even the same person.



I didn't think of this,but I think you may be right.

Cup8489
03-15-2012, 09:30 AM
Exactly, trollzilla and trolling for the win are two faces of the same coin.

They differ in style and strategy, but their sole purpose is to ridicule Nadal.

They could be even the same person.

naw, dftw isn't anywhere near as nuts as *********,rafawon,nadalwon,rafarg2005, ********* 2.0 etc.

mattennis
03-15-2012, 09:31 AM
What I mean is that there are many good posters here, like Mustard, zagor, Laurie.....but the inmense majority of posts end up being about answers to trolling posts of trollzilla or any other troll.

Why don't you all just ignore him?

I may be wrong about trolling for the win, but the 99% of his posts here are about Nadal, so something fishy there too, that is why sometimes I think they are the same one person, trying to ridicule Nadal in any possible way.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-15-2012, 09:35 AM
What I mean is that there are many good posters here, like Mustard, zagor, Laurie.....but the inmense majority of posts end up being about answers to trolling posts of trollzilla or any other troll.

Why don't you all just ignore him?

I may be wrong about trolling for the win, but the 99% of his posts here are about Nadal, so something fishy there too, that is why sometimes I think they are the same one person, trying to ridicule Nadal in any possible way.

Trust me we are not the same person. And frankly my posts on Nadal are simply meant to irk the Nadal trolls like Clarky et al. Don't take it too seriously.

marcub
03-15-2012, 10:01 AM
Before Nadal closed the gap.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/001/451/514/124802391_crop_650x440.jpg?1319063060

This is what happened after Nadal closed the gap.

http://www.10sworld.com/tennis/sites/default/files/images/images/rafael-nadal-vs-novak-djokovic-2012-australian-open-trophy-ceremony.bigsplash.jpg

The gap has closed, as the dramatic difference in the two pictures indicate.

(Sorry for the trolling)

:) Best post in this thread. There are times when trolling is ok.

aphex
03-15-2012, 10:05 AM
I dont know whats wrong with all you Rafa haterz!

********* and nadalwon are esteemed, knowledgeable posters who are highly representative of our Rafa fanbase...

Vamos!

FlashFlare11
03-15-2012, 10:12 AM
what does 6-4=? And what does 2-0=?

This is domination at its finest. Simply brilliant!

celoft
03-15-2012, 10:22 AM
Djokovic already lost his advantage...Nadal will go on to beat him in every matches they will play from now on.

Delusional.

Evan77
03-15-2012, 10:51 AM
I dont know whats wrong with all you Rafa haterz!

********* and nadalwon are esteemed, knowledgeable posters who are highly representative of our Rafa fanbase...

Vamos!
are you kidding me, lol. they know nothing about tennis. all they know is NADAL, NADAL. the biggest 2 trolls on this board or probably in the universe.

as much as I disagree with Clarky sometimes, she's been pretty objective and funny.

Murrayfan31
03-15-2012, 12:45 PM
Basically he's saying is Rafa is more beatable.

Fate Archer
03-15-2012, 12:54 PM
Before Nadal closed the gap.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/001/451/514/124802391_crop_650x440.jpg?1319063060

This is what happened after Nadal closed the gap.

http://www.10sworld.com/tennis/sites/default/files/images/images/rafael-nadal-vs-novak-djokovic-2012-australian-open-trophy-ceremony.bigsplash.jpg

The gap has closed, as the dramatic difference in the two pictures indicate.

(Sorry for the trolling)

Haha, everyone trolls man. :)
What varies is the quality and quantity in a user's posting history. lol

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-15-2012, 01:08 PM
What Raonic is saying does make sense. Rafa wants the other player to take risks because their risks play into his game(retrieving and getting balls back). If a player is on, then they can pose a threat. However they must be able to keep the their foot on the pedal, something very few can do.

zapvor
03-15-2012, 10:53 PM
ok so i dont even get the debate in here. we got a guy like Raonic stating his story and what he thinks. i think each one of his words outweighs 1000pages of any of us can say about the game and what he thinks of fed and rafa's game...so...yea. period.