PDA

View Full Version : It's all mental for Federer.......


phat
06-11-2006, 10:46 AM
It was Nalbandian, now it's Nadal...... I wonder if he has a mental hurdle against ppl with last name with "Na" at the front. Okay, that's a very non-scienctific analysis, but what the hell. In this FO final, I have to say Fed had his chances in the fourth set leading 6-5, but Fed hit 2-3 stupid unforce errors in that game when Nadal was serving. If I was Fed, I will at least make Nadal hit some balls and make him feel the nerve or make him feel the pressure......He seems to be extremely nervous and Nadal sensed it and just play normally, and went on to win the match. The thing is he is always nervous against Nadal, or Nalbandian (before fed's Wimbledon title in 2003). I mean the way it goes, if Nadal can make it to the final of Wimbledon, Nadal will beat Fed..... Fed simply looks like a toothless lion against Nadal.

Simon Cowell
06-11-2006, 10:59 AM
It's more like 70% technical and physical to 30% mental. His game cannot hang with Nadal's. He cannot ball with him.

exruda
06-11-2006, 11:04 AM
Of course Fed can outplay Nadal. It's just as if every time he starts winning there is a red light and he thinks "no, this is too good to be true", slows down and makes a next srting of 15 unforced errors. So IMO it's all about the mental approach.

-- and what follows is that I guess Fed has the conviction that he is the best grass-courter (ever?), so any Fed-Nadal match on grass will result in a blowout as Fed will not hesitate.

typingchamp
07-07-2006, 01:44 PM
Actually I don't think it's all mental. Sometimes the other player is just better (except maybe on grass).

If Nadal sucked but always beat Federer then maybe it's mental for Federer. But remember, Federer is not the only one to have trouble with Nadal. It would be like saying Roddick loses to Federer because it is mental. Haha. Maybe someone is just better.

kchau
07-07-2006, 01:46 PM
Actually I don't think it's all mental. Sometimes the other player is just better (except maybe on grass).

If Nadal sucked but always beat Federer then maybe it's mental for Federer. But remember, Federer is not the only one to have trouble with Nadal. It would be like saying Roddick loses to Federer because it is mental. Haha. Maybe someone is just better.

or maybe it is metal and ur just a fanboy -_-

alot of the game is mental, you really have to push yourself.

but look at fed, he always seems relaxed when he plays, i bet he can push himself harder than that.

jaykay
07-07-2006, 01:46 PM
It's more like 70% technical and physical to 30% mental. His game cannot hang with Nadal's. He cannot ball with him.

You Nadal-stalker, you... :rolleyes: :p

punch
07-07-2006, 01:48 PM
Simon Cowell you are ridiculous.

Have you watched any of Federer's matches on grass yet?
He has EASILY disposed of every single opponent.

You stick Nadal against Federer's draw you can make an argument that Nadal could lose to any one of them.
Infact Berdych and Ancic would handily dispose of Nadal on grass, IMO.

I know you love protecting and promoting you're Nadal...but get real here man, this is Federer's surface, Fed's home (wimby) Fed's past. Nadal is a great fighter but he will not win this one, the only time Nadal will beat Federer is on clay.

MsPiggy
07-07-2006, 01:52 PM
Don't you think by now Roger has learned his lesson in the French final? He will go into the final on Sunday FULLY PREPARED, just you wait and see.

fastdunn
07-07-2006, 03:32 PM
A half of it is mental but the other half has definite substances
Federer has not solved. Nadal's strength fits right into Federer's
weakness: classic example of Brad Glibert's strategy.

Federer vastly improved it on clay and theoretically he now should
be able to beat Nadal on hard courts. On grass, it's uncertain whether
Nadal's game actually would work against Federer.

But again, since Nadal's strength fits right into Federer's
weakness, Federer won't be able to dominate Nadal on
grass like he does to other players. I mean Federer should be
able to beat Nadal but not as easily as with other players, IMHO.

Dilettante
07-07-2006, 03:42 PM
I wonder if he has a mental hurdle against ppl with last name with "Na" at the front. Okay, that's a very non-scienctific analysis, but what the hell.

Of course you're kidding,but you never know...Wasn't Axl Rose who couldn't perform gigs in towns of which name started by "M"?

Count Grishnackh
07-07-2006, 04:30 PM
Actually I don't think it's all mental. Sometimes the other player is just better (except maybe on grass).

If Nadal sucked but always beat Federer then maybe it's mental for Federer. But remember, Federer is not the only one to have trouble with Nadal. It would be like saying Roddick loses to Federer because it is mental. Haha. Maybe someone is just better.

Well if it were just mental then he would have followed up that victory in Miami in 05 but since then he's lost 5 in a row. Wouldn't he have figured out the riddle after that match? If anything, it looks like Nadal figured out Fed when no one else has. If Nadal were ranked like 50 and beat Fed, then yeah it's mental. But if it weren't for Fed, Nadal would be the dominant number one player right now. So obviously there's the game of Nadal, but the mental part comes into play during break points and tiebreaks. If it were just mental Fed would have done something about it a long time ago.

typingchamp
07-07-2006, 05:49 PM
or maybe it is metal and ur just a fanboy -_-

alot of the game is mental, you really have to push yourself.

but look at fed, he always seems relaxed when he plays, i bet he can push himself harder than that.

I am a fanboy . . . of both Nadal and Federer. They reached finals of both Wimby and French in same year . . . that is fantastic for tennis.

I don't think it's about Federer pushing himself . . . sometimes that's just someone's demeanor. I would say Federer was giving his all in his matches all the time (always going for 6-0 like no one else before).

But yeah, you never responded to what I said about Roddick vs. Federer. Sometimes a player is just better and it's not mental. Or do you think Roddick loses to Federer because it is a mental block?

I also mentioned that sometimes it's not all mental. We have yet to see who the better player will turn out to be yet. If Nadal ends career with lots of slams and being number one, maybe people will give Nadal credit and say he is good instead of saying Roger loses because it is mental.

If Nadal loses to Federer on Sunday, I will say it is because Roger is better player on grass, not that Nadal losing is mental.

Simon Cowell you are ridiculous.

Have you watched any of Federer's matches on grass yet?
He has EASILY disposed of every single opponent.

You stick Nadal against Federer's draw you can make an argument that Nadal could lose to any one of them.
Infact Berdych and Ancic would handily dispose of Nadal on grass, IMO.

I know you love protecting and promoting you're Nadal...but get real here man, this is Federer's surface, Fed's home (wimby) Fed's past. Nadal is a great fighter but he will not win this one, the only time Nadal will beat Federer is on clay.

On clay and hardcourt and maybe on grass (maybe not but Nadal has a better chance than anyone on tour right now).

Berdych and Ancic huh? Just like how Nadal was gonna get destroyed by Agassi, Nieminen and Baghdatis right?

Well if it were just mental then he would have followed up that victory in Miami in 05 but since then he's lost 5 in a row. Wouldn't he have figured out the riddle after that match? If anything, it looks like Nadal figured out Fed when no one else has. If Nadal were ranked like 50 and beat Fed, then yeah it's mental. But if it weren't for Fed, Nadal would be the dominant number one player right now. So obviously there's the game of Nadal, but the mental part comes into play during break points and tiebreaks. If it were just mental Fed would have done something about it a long time ago.

This is exactly what I'm trying to say!!! Yeah for Count Grishnackh.

If Nadal loses to Fed on Sunday, it is because Fed is superior on grass at the moment. I wouldn't take credit away from Fed for the win like people are taking away credit from Nadal for beating Fed, saying it's mental.

Why didn't people say it was mental when Fed beats people? Nadal is every bit as dominant on clay as Fed is on grass and yet Nadal winning French was still mental? Gimme a break. Sometimes a player is just better.

It's Federer's chance to prove that on Sunday . . . and whoever wins, it won't be mental . . . it will be that the other player was better.

Bassus
07-07-2006, 06:36 PM
It's more like 70% technical and physical to 30% mental. His game cannot hang with Nadal's. He cannot ball with him.


No, those percentages are way off. Its closer to 50-50. There are other players who can consistently attack Federer's backhand, but Federer doesn't seem to buckle under the pressure against them. Blowing two match points -- with his forehand, the game's best -- in Rome was a sign of mental collapse and choking. That Federer didn't try slicing the backhand more in the French final was a sign of stubborness.

But that's not to say Nadal's game doesn't match up well against Nadal. He can retrieve and turn defense to offense better than anyone, and of course, there is the whole lefty forehand to backhand advantage.

I wonder how things would be if Nadal had played as the natural right-hander he is, instead of developing a lefty game?

FEDEXP
07-07-2006, 07:32 PM
"But that's not to say Nadal's game doesn't match up well against Nadal".
Bassus

well stated....

Ronnie7
07-07-2006, 07:49 PM
Federer will KILL Nadal on grass.

punch
07-07-2006, 08:13 PM
Eh...I never picked Agassi to beat Nadal and I sure as hell didn't pick Neimenen. Berdych and Ancic both have a MUCH better shot to take Nadal down ( on grass) than anyone in Nadal's draw, bar Bags and maybe Agassi.

Just please try and put Nadal in Fed's draw and honestly think about where he would have won/lost.

typingchamp
07-07-2006, 11:09 PM
Eh...I never picked Agassi to beat Nadal and I sure as hell didn't pick Neimenen. Berdych and Ancic both have a MUCH better shot to take Nadal down ( on grass) than anyone in Nadal's draw, bar Bags and maybe Agassi.

Just please try and put Nadal in Fed's draw and honestly think about where he would have won/lost.

And I think there is no one else in the Wimbledon draw who has as good a shot at winning against Fed in the finals than Nadal. That to me shows he deserves to be there.

If you really don't think Nadal should be in the finals, who else would you really put there as his superior? Ancic and Berdych? Please. If those matches were finals, they would have been really disappointing.

Not saying Nadal would win, but I would imagine Nadal would give a better match than those two.