PDA

View Full Version : I cant believe that Nalbandian and Nadal havent faced each other


Steven87
07-13-2006, 02:13 PM
Someone PLEASE make this happen. This would be more entertaining than the 1000 Fed/Nad matches.

Marat Safinator
07-13-2006, 02:14 PM
I think nalbandian would win. He is more consistent than roger most times.

The tennis guy
07-13-2006, 02:18 PM
I think nalbandian would win. He is more consistent than roger most times.

Depends on where they play. On very fast court, Nalbandian has excellent chance to win.

weed
07-13-2006, 02:20 PM
I think Nadal could probably win easily. Nalbandian only seems to play aggressive on 2nd serve returns and I don't believe Nalbandian can beat Nadal from the baseline.

Steven87
07-13-2006, 02:23 PM
I think Nadal could probably win easily. Nalbandian only seems to play aggressive on 2nd serve returns and I don't believe Nalbandian can beat Nadal from the baseline.
Nalbandian is literally a machine at the baseline once he gets going

BaseLineBash
07-13-2006, 02:39 PM
I don't know guys... I like David Nalbandian, but he is sub-Agassi with better lateral wheels. It would be a tough match up for both.

VamosRafa
07-13-2006, 07:00 PM
Nalbandian hasn't lived up to his seeding, or Rafa has surpassed his.

That's the reason.

Bassus
07-13-2006, 07:15 PM
Someone PLEASE make this happen. This would be more entertaining than the 1000 Fed/Nad matches.


Surely you don't include the Rome final in that. Other than Federer choking away two match points on his forehand, that was a great match. Very high quality throughout.

splink779
07-13-2006, 07:50 PM
Nadal would win. Nalbandian can counterpunch very well, thats why he almost beat Federer twice in last years masters cup. On that quick court he was able to spank back Federer's shots. Sure he's super consistent, but he's not the best mover.

I just don't see people who aren't in excellent shape, or the slower guys, challenging Nadal unless they posess great power. Nadal can just move them around too much (see Agassi, Labadze, and that was on grass). Berdych showed that he can challenge Nadal by overpowering him in Cincy and pushing him in Bastad, on clay. He's not the quickest guy...

Nadal Safin, that would be excellent! Safin is decent in the speed department but he is so powerful that should compensate. Plus with his head on he is arguably top 2 or 3 material.

omniexist
07-13-2006, 08:23 PM
I agree, Safin should be able to give Nadal problems if he's "on". Big tall guy like that should love the high balls that Nadal feeds. Sort of like James Blake but maybe even better.

But right now I don't think Safin is in form enough to beat Nadal.

Buzzlightyear
07-13-2006, 08:31 PM
Nalbandian is very strong at his backhand wing. He has the backhand down the line that can give Nadal a lot of troubles and neutralize a lot of threats in Nadal's game. And I believe he moves a lot better than he was given credit for. It should be an interesting match up. But of course, his mental game is suspectable and it could be a huge crack in his armour when he face Nadal.

splink779
07-13-2006, 08:39 PM
Thinking about Safin and his mental game, how he can only play his best some of the time... makes me really appreciate Federer and Nadal. You can pretty much guarantee going into the match that both of these guys will play their best, and that they are not going to beat themselves. And that applies 99% of the time too. Incredible. You cannot say that for many others on tour.

SER
07-13-2006, 08:45 PM
i myself was curious about this a few days ago, was like hmmm i wonder what the head 2head is on these 2, and sure as isht it said 0-0, i know they have been like 1 match away from meeting each other like 15 times but i guess one of them always loses

edberg505
07-14-2006, 12:14 AM
Nalbandian hasn't lived up to his seeding, or Rafa has surpassed his.

That's the reason.

Not entirely true. If you look back at the draws this past year starting with the Aussie Open, Nalbandian routinely advances to he semis in just about every tournament he plays. There was maybe 3 or so that he didn't get to the semis. The truth of the matter is that somehow, miraculously Nalbandian never ends up on Nadal's side of the draw. There were only 2 instances where he and Nadal was on the same side of the draw and in one he lost early and in the other Nadal lost early. I love Nalbandian for my fantasy team because he is pretty much automatic for a spot in the semis. I dunno what the hell happend to him in Wimby, but even then he was still on Fed's side of the draw.

superman1
07-14-2006, 12:25 AM
Nalbandian doesn't have the weapons. Safin vs Nadal, now THAT would be the clash of the titans. Safin always plays his best when he's the underdog and is facing a big name. I think that would be one of the toughest matches in Nadal's life because he'd constantly be scurrying and scrambling. Most likely Safin would undo himself by missing the winners.

edberg505
07-14-2006, 01:03 AM
Nalbandian doesn't have the weapons. Safin vs Nadal, now THAT would be the clash of the titans. Safin always plays his best when he's the underdog and is facing a big name. I think that would be one of the toughest matches in Nadal's life because he'd constantly be scurrying and scrambling. Most likely Safin would undo himself by missing the winners.

He does indeed have the weapons. Just ask Federer. Federer was getting his clock cleaned before Nalbandian retired in the French. And also delivered 1 of the 4 losses that Federer had last year.

BaseLineBash
07-14-2006, 01:28 AM
He does indeed have the weapons. Just ask Federer. Federer was getting his clock cleaned before Nalbandian retired in the French. And also delivered 1 of the 4 losses that Federer had last year.
Last year Fed had a bum ankle, hardly a true win. Thats like saying if we had two horses racing each other and yours won, only mine had a respiratory illness...just not cut and dry.

superman1
07-14-2006, 01:34 AM
Nalbandian would have to play the match of his life to beat Nadal. He doesn't have the weapons to hit through Nadal like Blake and potentially Safin can, but he does have great control of the ball and if he could get in control of the rallies and run Nadal around, he'd have a shot. It's the same situation with Agassi vs Nadal, except that Agassi hits the ball better and Nalbandian moves better.

edberg505
07-14-2006, 01:39 AM
Nalbandian would have to play the match of his life to beat Nadal. He doesn't have the weapons to hit through Nadal like Blake and potentially Safin can, but he does have great control of the ball and if he could get in control of the rallies and run Nadal around, he'd have a shot. It's the same situation with Agassi vs Nadal, except that Agassi hits the ball better and Nalbandian moves better.

Nalbandian has plenty of mustard on his shots. He can surely hit through you. Also Nadal's forehand to Nalbandian's backhand wouldn't give him any trouble at all. I would be quite intrested in seeing this match up.

edberg505
07-14-2006, 01:42 AM
Last year Fed had a bum ankle, hardly a true win. Thats like saying if we had two horses racing each other and yours won, only mine had a respiratory illness...just not cut and dry.

Yeah, I remember. But a win is a win. I could say the same about Federer's win over Nalbandian this year at the French. Only difference in the analogy is my horse didn't finish the race.

jings
07-14-2006, 02:09 AM
Not entirely true. If you look back at the draws this past year starting with the Aussie Open, Nalbandian routinely advances to he semis in just about every tournament he plays. There was maybe 3 or so that he didn't get to the semis. The truth of the matter is that somehow, miraculously Nalbandian never ends up on Nadal's side of the draw. There were only 2 instances where he and Nadal was on the same side of the draw and in one he lost early and in the other Nadal lost early. I love Nalbandian for my fantasy team because he is pretty much automatic for a spot in the semis. I dunno what the hell happend to him in Wimby, but even then he was still on Fed's side of the draw.

You have to fight fair, logic and facts are not admissible.