PDA

View Full Version : Nadal vs Federer: Not much of a rivalry


tangerine
06-11-2006, 11:43 AM
I'm reminded of Andy Roddick's comment at Wimbledon a few years ago: "I'm going to have start winning some of these matches before it can be called a rivalry."

Rafael is now 6-1 over Roger. After that tremendous final in Rome, I thought for sure that Roger had Rafa figured out and would pull off a win. Instead, after the first set today, he didn't even bother showing up, and played some of the worst tennis I've seen him play in quite a while.

Granted, Nadal has that effect on many players; Rafa was going to make Roger earn it.

Perhaps the media should lay off the "great rivalry" hype until Roger starts winning some of these matches. I think Rafa will do well on the summer hardcourts and perhaps there Roger can exact his revenge. Still, a win over Rafa on fastcourt wouldn't be quite as sweet as getting one on clay.

Thank goodness the clay season is over, now we can get to the real tennis: GRASS. :cool:

grizzly4life
06-11-2006, 11:51 AM
the rivalry seems to have interested you enough to write 5 paragraphs about it ;)

EDIT: i actually only saw your headline. your comments didn't go where i thought they would..... as witnessed by my poll, i think federer has to change his game for the clay season to win. that backhand is NEVER going to get it done vs. nadal at FO on clay (FO >>>>>>> rome, for both players).

chiru
06-11-2006, 11:53 AM
i wouldn't say that its not much of a rivalry. i dont remember the last time roddick took a set off of federer, and it seems federer alwasy makes it at least somewhat close. i mean rome was closer than hell. the difference is that roddick never really has a reasonable chance of winning. thats not true of fed vs. nadal

sandiegotennisboy
06-11-2006, 11:54 AM
whats the PC term for someone who always busts your ass?

JayxTheKoolest
06-11-2006, 11:54 AM
It's not an interesting rivalery because the player's styles don't work well together. It always seems as if one or the other is dominating the point and there isn't much room for evenly fought points. That's not exactly what I was trying to say, but whatever.

JayxTheKoolest
06-11-2006, 11:55 AM
whats the PC term for someone who always busts your ass?

"I wasn't playing my best"

Jassy_B
06-11-2006, 11:56 AM
I'm reminded of Andy Roddick's comment at Wimbledon a few years ago: "I'm going to have start winning some of these matches before it can be called a rivalry."

Rafael is now 6-1 over Roger. After that tremendous final in Rome, I thought for sure that Roger had Rafa figured out and would pull off a win. Instead, after the first set today, he didn't even bother showing up, and played some of the worst tennis I've seen him play in quite a while.

Granted, Nadal has that effect on many players; Rafa was going to make Roger earn it.

Perhaps the media should lay off the "great rivalry" hype until Roger starts winning some of these matches. I think Rafa will do well on the summer hardcourts and perhaps there Roger can exact his revenge. Still, a win over Rafa on fastcourt wouldn't be quite as sweet as getting one on clay.

Thank goodness the clay season is over, now we can get to the real tennis: GRASS. :cool:
use ur brain the majorityyyyyy of those matches were on clay. and nadal sux to bad to meet fed fed on any other surface

MasterTS
06-11-2006, 11:56 AM
No kidding.

DoubleHanded&LovinIt
06-11-2006, 12:15 PM
It's a rivalry in the sense that these two are the only consistently difficult competition for one another--they are, after all the #1 and #2 in the world. It's also a rivalry because, whereas Nadal has a clear edge on clay, Federer has a clear edge on grass, and it's a wash on hardcourts.

tlm
06-11-2006, 01:39 PM
There is no rivalry, nadal owns fed.

Rhino
06-13-2006, 03:26 PM
There is no rivalry, nadal owns fed.
OK, look at the McEnroe/Lendl rivalry.
The first 9 matches they played together (between 1980 and 1982), Lendl led the head to head against McEnroe 7-2, in fact winning 7 in a row - much like the Federer/Nadal situation, and yet during this time Lendl was never ranked #1. Sound familiar?

What happened next? McEnroe struck back and won 10 out of their next 12 matches (1983 - 1985) including their only ever meeting at Wimbledon - but Lendl finally got to number 1 in 1983.
McEnroe was the game's No. 1 seed for four years until his US Open defeat at the hands of Lendl in 1985.

I think Fed/Rafa could go the same way, just be patient.

fastdunn
06-13-2006, 03:47 PM
I think Fed/Rafa could go the same way, just be patient.

Wait, there is a difference.

McEnroe had prime time between 1983 - 1985 which is when McEnroe
striked back. McEnroe was unbeatable at that time. Even more than
Federer's year 2005.

In the same time period, McEnroe also turned the table against Connors who
had 6-1 edge over McEnroe until 1983 (just like Nadal over Federer).

McEnroe was rookie before 1983 and had losing records against
most of top players and he peaked at around 1984 and turned the table.
The difference is that Nadal is the rookie and did it in probably
Federer's prime time 2005 - 2006, unless, Federer's real prime time is ahead.

I'm sure Federer will win some and improve his head-to-head record
against Nadal. But the time is not really on his side. By the time Nadal
turns 25 and maybe mature on other faster surfaces, Federer is 30..
IMHO, this is potentially non-trivial challenge to Federer's career.

siber222000
06-13-2006, 04:14 PM
the rivalry seems to have interested you enough to write 5 paragraphs about it ;)

EDIT: i actually only saw your headline. your comments didn't go where i thought they would..... as witnessed by my poll, i think federer has to change his game for the clay season to win. that backhand is NEVER going to get it done vs. nadal at FO on clay (FO >>>>>>> rome, for both players).
hahah good one

knasty131
06-13-2006, 04:19 PM
being a federer fan...i will still agree that nadal owns federer......at this point at least...rogers game just doesnt match up well with nadals, and that guys fight is amazing...i think the win/loss will start to even out here soon though...with the hardcourt season (if nadal even gets far enough to play him that is) federer i think will get some quality wins on the lefty and im sure that will give him some more confidence...but kudos to nadal up to this point...im not upset though, because i still believe Fed will prove to be one of the greatest of all time...i think it is ok to have one person in the world who has you beat, as long as you get all the others lol

knasty131
06-13-2006, 04:20 PM
OK, look at the McEnroe/Lendl rivalry.
The first 9 matches they played together (between 1980 and 1982), Lendl led the head to head against McEnroe 7-2, in fact winning 7 in a row - much like the Federer/Nadal situation, and yet during this time Lendl was never ranked #1. Sound familiar?

What happened next? McEnroe struck back and won 10 out of their next 12 matches (1983 - 1985) including their only ever meeting at Wimbledon - but Lendl finally got to number 1 in 1983.
McEnroe was the game's No. 1 seed for four years until his US Open defeat at the hands of Lendl in 1985.

I think Fed/Rafa could go the same way, just be patient.


I agree...didnt read this until after i wrote my post

BHud
06-13-2006, 04:32 PM
Rivalry? ...only during clay court season...Nadal will need to pick up his game on the other surfaces if he expects to be considered nothing more than a great clay court specialist...

Count Grishnackh
06-13-2006, 06:06 PM
Rivalry? ...only during clay court season...Nadal will need to pick up his game on the other surfaces if he expects to be considered nothing more than a great clay court specialist...

Take a lookie. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FHlQDh-PVo&search=nadal%20federer

So much for Nadal just beating him on clay. Your boy is in serious trouble.

fastdunn
06-13-2006, 06:37 PM
Take a lookie. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FHlQDh-PVo&search=nadal%20federer

So much for Nadal just beating him on clay. Your boy is in serious trouble.

Yeah, impressive display of Nadal's out-playing Federer shot by shot.
Even some net plays..

tlm
06-13-2006, 06:54 PM
Ya it really looks like nadal cant play on a hardcourt.I cant wait for us open series this summer.

There are more examples of nadal making incredible shots in that clip,shots that no one else can make in the game today or ever for that matter.

I dont know how anybody can watch that unreal display of tennis+not give nadal his due respect.This kid is something special.

Rhino
06-14-2006, 02:09 AM
Wait, there is a difference.
McEnroe was rookie before 1983
Oh yeah right, McEnroe first reached the World No. 1 singles ranking in March 1980, in fact he won his first US Open in 1979, then again in 1980, and again in 1981.... and those Wimbledon finals were nothing, right?. Finally breaking Borgs run in the 1981 final..... doesn't sound like a rookie to me!

pound cat
06-14-2006, 02:26 AM
I find it really interesting that Rafa's goal is to some day win Wimbldon. I guess he figures his hardcourt game will be enough for him to win the other 2 Slams. Rafa is after Federer's head, and if he can get his grass game going, he will be even bigger trouble for Roger. Exciting times ahead.

Rhino
06-14-2006, 02:49 AM
I find it really interesting that Rafa's goal is to some day win Wimbldon. I guess he figures his hardcourt game will be enough for him to win the other 2 Slams. Rafa is after Federer's head, and if he can get his grass game going, he will be even bigger trouble for Roger. Exciting times ahead.
Rafa has played 6 pro grass court matches ever and his record is 3-3.
It's much more likely that Federer with his record on clay will be bigger trouble for Rafa.

Fischer76
06-14-2006, 02:56 AM
I find it really interesting that Rafa's goal is to some day win Wimbldon. I guess he figures his hardcourt game will be enough for him to win the other 2 Slams. Rafa is after Federer's head, and if he can get his grass game going, he will be even bigger trouble for Roger. Exciting times ahead.

True ... I think he has been rather successful in rattling Federers cage. If Rafa can give Federer some measure of trouble at Wimby this year (not beat) then that would be half the battle won already. Rafa has a good chance of a good showing in the USO. I hope he can add more zip to his already reliable serve and a little bit more practice on his volleys, he will definitely be a force to contend with in all surfaces in the future.

Gilgamesh
06-14-2006, 05:36 AM
It's the most hyped rivalry we have now because Nadal is the only one on the tour that can consistently challenge Fed.

However, the initial poster is right it is not much of a rivalry...not because Fed can't win...but the question is still out there whether or not the rivalry can extend beyond only major clay tournaments.

Moose Malloy
06-14-2006, 08:06 AM
I think this is the 1st time the #1 has lost 5 straight matches to anyone since McEnroe-Lendl '81/'82.

dh003i
06-14-2006, 08:52 AM
Moose,

And McEnroe turned it around and owned the **** out of Lendl thereafter, until he became a part-time player...

I wouldn't be surprised to see the same happen with Federer-Nadal

fastdunn
06-14-2006, 09:30 AM
Oh yeah right, McEnroe first reached the World No. 1 singles ranking in March 1980, in fact he won his first US Open in 1979, then again in 1980, and again in 1981.... and those Wimbledon finals were nothing, right?. Finally breaking Borgs run in the 1981 final..... doesn't sound like a rookie to me!

OK. I take the "rookie" comment back. But you know what I mean.

McEnroe was improving and then peaked from 83-85.
Despite McEnroe start winning slams and reach #1, he was relatively
new and still couldn't solve Connors and Lendle until he matured from 83-85.

But Nadal vs Federer is different. Nadal is a rookie and still behind Federer.
But it's more experienced Federer who's having problem with this
new guy. That's the difference.

Moose Malloy
06-14-2006, 09:39 AM
Moose,

And McEnroe turned it around and owned the **** out of Lendl thereafter, until he became a part-time player...

I wouldn't be surprised to see the same happen with Federer-Nadal

Perhaps, I was just surprised that it hadn't happened to any other #1 since Mac(losing 5 straight to someone) At least I can't find someone who did that to Lendl, Sampras etc when they were #1.

McEnroe was improving and then peaked from 83-85.
Despite McEnroe start winning slams and reach #1, he was relatively
new and still couldn't solve Connors and Lendle until he matured from 83-85.

But Nadal vs Federer is different. Nadal is a rookie and still behind Federer.
But it's more experienced Federer who's having problem with this
new guy. That's the difference.

I think Lendl could be considered the rookie circa '81/'82, while Mac was #1.

aramis
06-14-2006, 12:02 PM
It's not an interesting rivalery because the player's styles don't work well together. It always seems as if one or the other is dominating the point and there isn't much room for evenly fought points. That's not exactly what I was trying to say, but whatever.
Exactly.
The only reason why this matchup gets so much attention is because of the "story" behind it, but when the two get on court to play tennis the points are actually really boring to watch. The result of their matches gets more attention than the actual tennis that was played, which shows that a lot of people dont find it captivating. Let's have some more Hewitt/Ferrero or Federer/Safin matchups; may not have any "story" or buildup like Fed/Nadal, but at least the points are electrifying and beautifully played.
I remember these forums a year ago when Safin beat Fed in that Aus Open semi, there were very few negative threads about either player (like there are now for Federer and Nadal); there were probably some, but mostly people wanted to express how much they loved the MATCH that was played, regardless of who won in the end. Honestly, was there anyone who could take their eyes off the tv during that match? It was that captivating.
Same with the Hewitt/Ferrero match several years ago in the Shainghai final; the atmosphere was electric and the rallies were absolutely stunning. Watching that match, you got the feeling that the crowd didn't really care who won, they just didn't want the match to end.
I know I've only given two examples, but these were the two that came off the top of my head; there are definitely more matches that produced this kind of effect on the viewers. I know when it comes down to it, this topic is very subjective, but does the tennis Federer and Nadal produce against each other bring the same electrifying atmosphere as those other two matches, or even the Agassi/Sampras USO qf in 2001? In my opinion, none of their matches have, the only exception being the Miami final last year; and if the popularity of ATP tennis is to increase in a respectable way, unlike the WTA, we need more matches that "glue" your eyes to the tv.

snark
06-14-2006, 01:26 PM
True ... I think he has been rather successful in rattling Federers cage. If Rafa can give Federer some measure of trouble at Wimby this year (not beat) then that would be half the battle won already. Rafa has a good chance of a good showing in the USO.

It is the other way around. If they meet at Wimbledon and Fed wins, he would have more confidence when they meet next on hard court.