PDA

View Full Version : The Next Federer?


uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 05:18 PM
I know Nadal has beaten Federer a few times this year. But I don't think he will replace Federer as the top dog. Who do you guys think has the potential to dethrone Federer?

SER
07-14-2006, 05:27 PM
Djokovic, maybe Baghdatis, but nobody is going to dethrone him anytime soon

Chang
07-14-2006, 05:57 PM
I don't think Federer will get off the no.1 spot for a while.

Marat Safinator
07-14-2006, 05:58 PM
I agreee but I think Baghdatis, Djokovic, Korolev can do some damage.

unjugon
07-14-2006, 06:00 PM
If Djokovic gets to number 1 in the world I quit playing or watching tennis.

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 06:04 PM
If Djokovic gets to number 1 in the world I quit playing or watching tennis.

Haha, agreed.

superman1
07-14-2006, 06:13 PM
Djokovic, so overrated.

Baghdatis and Gasquet seem to have the best chance, but I don't think we'll see another Federer in a LONG time. It's nearly impossible to have that kind of consistency for so long.

shawn1122
07-14-2006, 06:14 PM
Only Baghdatis has the potential. He's way better than the rest of the young players.

Jonas
07-14-2006, 06:18 PM
The next Federer is Gasquet. I have been saying it for years. He has the game to do it right now, but the mental aspect is missing, but then again we all bummed on Federer untill '03 for being a mental midget.
The similarities between the 2 are very ominous.

shawn1122
07-14-2006, 06:23 PM
The next Federer is Gasquet. I have been saying it for years. He has the game to do it right now, but the mental aspect is missing, but then again we all bummed on Federer untill '03 for being a mental midget.
The similarities between the 2 are very ominous.
I've never seen Gasquet portray a great degree of shotmaking ability.

unjugon
07-14-2006, 06:25 PM
I've never seen Gasquet portray a great degree of shotmaking ability.
Which player right now has more flair and shotmaking ability than Gasquet -other than Federer??

quest01
07-14-2006, 06:26 PM
I dont think anyone will. Nobody will ever have the record he has had from 04 to now. That would be almost impossible for any player play at such a high level as Federer. So i dont think its ever going to happen.

VamosRafa
07-14-2006, 06:34 PM
I know Nadal has beaten Federer a few times this year. But I don't think he will replace Federer as the top dog. Who do you guys think has the potential to dethrone Federer?

You are quite correct that Nadal is not the next Federer; he's the first Nadal. As Brad Gilbert said last year, at some point people will be looking at who is the next Nadal.

And I do think Nadal will replace Federer as top dog at some point.

I don't see anyone else out there being able to do it.

quest01
07-14-2006, 06:38 PM
You are quite correct that Nadal is not the next Federer; he's the first Nadal. As Brad Gilbert said last year, at some point people will be looking at who is the next Nadal.

And I do think Nadal will replace Federer as top dog at some point.

I don't see anyone else out there being able to do it.

Nadal is a great player but he will always be remembered as a clay court specialist. He doesnt have the all court game like Federer does. Nadals only true strength is clay and unfortunately when his tennis career is all said and done the majority of people will remember him as a clay court specialist.

VamosRafa
07-14-2006, 06:40 PM
Nadal is a great player but he will always be remembered as a clay court specialist. He doesnt have the all court game like Federer does. Nadals only true strength is clay and unfortunately when his tennis career is all said and done the majority of people will remember him as a clay court specialist.

Your crystal ball must be clearer than mine, as Rafa's hardcourt and grass results seem to suggest otherwise.

But perhaps you are a bit myopic, too. :D

Volly master
07-14-2006, 06:47 PM
i think Quest is trying to say that since Nadal broke Vilas record of clay matches one, that will be the thing he is mainly remembered for, AT THIS POINT in his career. sure he has had good runs at other big events on different surfaces yes, but his dominace on clay is what is making him a legend right now.

VamosRafa
07-14-2006, 06:57 PM
i think Quest is trying to say that since Nadal broke Vilas record of clay matches one, that will be the thing he is mainly remembered for, AT THIS POINT in his career. sure he has had good runs at other big events on different surfaces yes, but his dominace on clay is what is making him a legend right now.

That's a good point, but it's hard to think of someone who just turned 20 as being remembered for one thing, when we still have no clue how much more he will accomplish. But his legendary status on clay is something we likely can take to the bank at this point. Quest certainly suggested (and in fact predicted) that is all he will ever take to the bank. But all indications are to the contrary.

SER
07-14-2006, 07:19 PM
I changed my mind I think the next great player will be Monfils

bluescreen
07-14-2006, 07:39 PM
i think gasquet is gonna fall short. bags, imo, has the best chance of being the next definate top player. next federer is a long shot since i dont think anyone on tour at the moment has his brilliance. but i think baghdatis has a shot. nadal's gonna do his own thing and be his own person so i'm not considering him.

The Pusher Terminator
07-14-2006, 07:42 PM
I don't think Federer will get off the no.1 spot for a while.

Are you kidding? If Nadal wins the US Open then I think Nadal will be in the number 1 spot.

bluescreen
07-14-2006, 07:46 PM
i dont think nadal would get #1 just by winning US Open. fed has a big lead on everyone points wise. he'd have to lose early in almost every tournament to lose his spot that quickly. but i dont see him being dethroned at the US Open this year anyway. maybe AO, but that still wouldnt give his spot to nadal. i say fed's got #1 to the end of next year easy. but lets get back to the original topic.

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 07:59 PM
Hmmm Baghdatis might do it. What do you guys think of my idea of the FedCrusher:

Serve - Roddick
Forehand - Agassi
Backhand - Nalbandian
Volley - Dent

ACE of Hearts
07-14-2006, 08:03 PM
Sorry man but Roddick's serve?It could easily be the worse right now.Everyone has picked it off.All u have to do is send it back and Roddick goes awol:rolleyes:

VamosRafa
07-14-2006, 08:04 PM
Hmmm Baghdatis might do it. What do you guys think of my idea of the FedCrusher:

Serve - Roddick
Forehand - Agassi
Backhand - Nalbandian
Volley - Dent

I think the point is that if you had Roddick's serve, and could back it up with Agassi's forehand, Nalbandian's backhand, and Dent's volleys, you may have a shot of beating Fed. And maybe you would, if you are talking about Fed facing a right-handed player. If not:

One change, for sure:

Forehand - Nadal

Even Agassi said that Rafa has the one shot they all wish they had against Fed -- the left-handed forehand to Fed's backhand.

Second change:

Think you are right with the rest, although it's been so long since I've seen Taylor volley, I'm not sure. He's never been a Top contender, so it's hard to rate his volley against Henman's, for example.


Still, if you are looking for a FedCrusher, you can't ignore the Nadal formula, as it has had a bit of success.

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 08:16 PM
Henman was my next choice; it was a close call. I also wanted to put Safin in for the backhand side, but chose Nalby over him. Other than Nadal who else has the right forehand?

edberg505
07-14-2006, 08:19 PM
I think the point is that if you had Roddick's serve, and could back it up with Agassi's forehand, Nalbandian's backhand, and Dent's volleys, you may have a shot of beating Fed. And maybe you would, if you are talking about Fed facing a right-handed player. If not:

One change, for sure:

Forehand - Nadal

Even Agassi said that Rafa has the one shot they all wish they had against Fed -- the left-handed forehand to Fed's backhand.

Second change:

Think you are right with the rest, although it's been so long since I've seen Taylor volley, I'm not sure. He's never been a Top contender, so it's hard to rate his volley against Henman's, for example.


Still, if you are looking for a FedCrusher, you can't ignore the Nadal formula, as it has had a bit of success.

I think Taylor's volleys are the best out there. Maybe it used to be Henman about 2 or 3 years ago. Taylor's only problem has been his fitness. But I would venture to say that before he got injured he had the best serve and volley game on the tour. I'd change the backhand to Safin though. Safin's backhand is unreal.

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 08:29 PM
I think if Safin can play at the level he is capable of every match, he can definitely give Federer trouble.

FEDEXP
07-14-2006, 08:38 PM
It's just impossible, at this time, to forsee the next Federer (and no, VamosRafa, as good as Nadal is, he is not the next Federer- that's an oxymoron).

SER
07-14-2006, 08:40 PM
It's just impossible, at this time, to forsee the next Federer (and no, VamosRafa, as good as Nadal is, he is not the next Federer- that's an oxymoron).


Nadal is not the next Federer, Nadal is the next Nadal

Dilettante
07-14-2006, 08:46 PM
I know Nadal has beaten Federer a few times this year. But I don't think he will replace Federer as the top dog. Who do you guys think has the potential to dethrone Federer?

At the moment, I don't see anyone capable of getting the #1 spot besides -although unlikely- Nadal. If Federer has a weaker season, maybe Nadal could, but that needs to happen. Rogelio is playing at an insane level all the time.

For the rest of the field, by now I don't see another potential number 1. Just look at the points, and there are two big gaps:

Federer ---->big gap----> Nadal --->big gap ----> the others.

Nadal is not the next Federer, Nadal is the next Nadal

Ditto.

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 08:46 PM
I'd love to see Nadal with Federer's racquet... :mrgreen:

VamosRafa
07-14-2006, 08:47 PM
It's just impossible, at this time, to forsee the next Federer (and no, VamosRafa, as good as Nadal is, he is not the next Federer- that's an oxymoron).

I agree, and I'd like to take credit for talking about Nadal as the first Nadal and such, but Brad Gilbert turned me on to this idea, almost a year ago. Here's the exchange:

VR.COM: Some folks have been calling Nadal the next Thomas Muster. Do you agree?

GILBERT: No. Nadal is better than Muster. I believe Nadal is going to be a great player. Many people say Roger Federer is the next Pete Sampras. I think he’s the first Federer, and I think it’s the same with Nadal. In a few years, people will be calling some other player the “next Nadal.”

These guys are writing their own piece of history. And IMO, it would do Rafa an injustice to call him the "next Federer." Because that's not his goal, he's going for being the "first Nadal."

http://www.vamosrafael.com/articles/art469.html

TennisProPaul
07-14-2006, 09:04 PM
i think paul goldstein will pass nalbandian, then nadal, and then federer, in a go cart race, since he weighs less

sliceroni
07-14-2006, 09:24 PM
The proper time to ask this question is 4-5 (or more) yrs from now after Fed stops dominating the tour.

psamp14
07-14-2006, 09:25 PM
maybe too early to predict, but what about that 13 year old prodigy, Bernard Tomic from Australia?

Dilettante
07-14-2006, 09:30 PM
maybe too early to predict, but what about that 13 year old prodigy, Bernard Tomic from Australia?

The best for him would be getting as less attention as possible, and to avoid the hype as possible.

TennisProPaul
07-14-2006, 09:34 PM
FACT IS AS SCAREY AS IT SOUNDS, Rafa is improving more then Federer. Federer cant get any better, and Rafa will get sooo much better. Now his serve is 120+ average and can beat Federer almost at will unless its grass, Nadal will pass Federer in 1-2 years for sure.

100% positive

FREDDY
07-14-2006, 09:41 PM
serious, gasquet since the first time i saw him play i thought he already was a top player even though top 100 is top as he is 60 right now i think hes got it or shall i say gonna get it.

FREDDY
07-14-2006, 09:42 PM
FACT IS AS SCAREY AS IT SOUNDS, Rafa is improving more then Federer. Federer cant get any better, and Rafa will get sooo much better. Now his serve is 120+ average and can beat Federer almost at will unless its grass, Nadal will pass Federer in 1-2 years for sure.

100% positive

Federer can only get better, if of course you don't consider becoming wiser on the court(if that is possible).

uxnaitoahz
07-14-2006, 09:44 PM
Nadal may dominate clay but he is not nearly as good as FedExpress on the other surfaces, especially grass. In my opinion, unless Nadal can be as good at net as slugging loopy topspin forehands from the baseline, Nadal will never surpass Federer.

dewey2110
07-14-2006, 09:47 PM
hmm, you cant never tell anything surely about Nadal...He's full of surprise...Yes, he's improving fast and will be no.1 soon...but he won't be the next Federer. Why? not to start sth here, and I'm not a fan of any of them, but Nadal's character is way different from Federer...Federer sure is a great player but he's losing my respect with his attitude...Of course, we all get frustrated when we lose to sbd continously, and he's human after all, so I also think its reasonable...

dewey2110
07-14-2006, 09:50 PM
Nadal may dominate clay but he is not nearly as good as FedExpress on the other surfaces, especially grass. In my opinion, unless Nadal can be as good at net as slugging loopy topspin forehands from the baseline, Nadal will never surpass Federer.
that's just your way of putting it...Nadal is beating Fed on hard courts this year...I guess ppl can also say : Fed may dominate grass but he is not as good as Nadal on other surfaces, especially clay :neutral:
Nadal is improving at net, see his statistics on net points??? Also, Fed is getting more afraid of coming to net because of Nadal...

psamp14
07-14-2006, 10:01 PM
honestly i dont see monfils, berdych, baghdatis, or djokavic becoming the next federer...the next federer will be someone who plays sort of similar to federer, or some teenager right now who is winning almost every tournament he plays...gasquet is closest right now on tour, and bernard tomic is closest of the future...whats everyone's thoughts on bernard tomic? could he possibly be the real deal or will be become a donald young in 3-4 yrs,....

helloworld
07-14-2006, 11:24 PM
I think Bernard Tomic could be a thread to Nadal like the way Nadal is to Fed at the moment, but it's gonna take him mayby 4-5 more years to get to the top of professional tennis.However, we can never be sure about anything, if he gets too much hype, he might lose it and become the next Donald Young... who knows ?

typingchamp
07-15-2006, 12:42 AM
No one.

But Nadal will maybe be the next number one. Probably at Australian Open.

I don't really see much in this new group of youngsters. I'll wait to see more of them. Baghdatis is the best of the bunch (other than Nadal of course).

Nadal should win most improved player . . . and considering his year last year, that's saying a lot. Imagine him in a year or two!

VamosRafa
07-15-2006, 12:51 AM
No one.

But Nadal will maybe be the next number one. Probably at Australian Open.

I don't really see much in this new group of youngsters. I'll wait to see more of them. Baghdatis is the best of the bunch (other than Nadal of course).

Nadal should win most improved player . . . and considering his year last year, that's saying a lot. Imagine him in a year or two!

Rafa did win the ATP Most Improved Player for last year. Roger won the ATP Player of the Year, and he'll do it again this year, unless something drastic happens with an injury or something.

That is unlikely to happen, but you raise an interesting question, will the ATP again name Rafa as the most improved player, given that he is again the undisputed No. 2, at age 19/20, and has shown improvements on on-clay surfaces.

But can the ATP give him that title again, or do they need to give it some other player who has shown lots of improvement, but is nowhere near the Federer/Nadal calibre?

Rhino
07-15-2006, 01:58 AM
But can the ATP give him that title again, or do they need to give it some other player who has shown lots of improvement, but is nowhere near the Federer/Nadal calibre?
Well Rafa went from #3 (this time last year) to #2, I think maybe Andy Murray should have it, he was outside the top 200 this time last year and now he's 36 and rising.

HyperHorse
07-15-2006, 02:01 AM
That last Wimbledon means nothing....
By getting to the final, Nadal proved how ridiculously slow that grass was... You try looking @ old clips of Wimbledon on www.youtube.com and this years final and TELL ME that's the same surface...

Ive yet to ring the LTA and give them a piece of my mind, which i shall outline in another thread...

baros
07-15-2006, 05:39 AM
andy murray
________
launch box (http://mflbvaporizer.com)

Shabazza
07-15-2006, 06:25 AM
hmm, you cant never tell anything surely about Nadal...He's full of surprise...Yes, he's improving fast and will be no.1 soon...but he won't be the next Federer. Why? not to start sth here, and I'm not a fan of any of them, but Nadal's character is way different from Federer...Federer sure is a great player but he's losing my respect with his attitude...Of course, we all get frustrated when we lose to sbd continously, and he's human after all, so I also think its reasonable...
Which attitude are you talking about :confused:

Shabazza
07-15-2006, 06:28 AM
Rafa did win the ATP Most Improved Player for last year. Roger won the ATP Player of the Year, and he'll do it again this year, unless something drastic happens with an injury or something.

That is unlikely to happen, but you raise an interesting question, will the ATP again name Rafa as the most improved player, given that he is again the undisputed No. 2, at age 19/20, and has shown improvements on on-clay surfaces.

But can the ATP give him that title again, or do they need to give it some other player who has shown lots of improvement, but is nowhere near the Federer/Nadal calibre?
I'm pretty sure it goes to Murray or Baghdatis this year.

ShcMad
07-15-2006, 06:30 AM
Dickie Gasket is the next Fed.

Tennis_Goodness
07-15-2006, 06:57 AM
Gasquet and Baghdatis and Monfils are going to be really really good.

I've been picking Monfils to step it up for a while, I think phsycially he's going to be a monster. He already serves HUGE. I think Gasquet will become the full package though.

Even though Nadal is number 2 in the world right now, he doesn't have some of the shots and phsycial advantages as Monfils, Gasquet, and Baghdatis. They are better then him in some departments and that's why I think Nadal is not going to be the best Federer!

Shabazza
07-15-2006, 08:24 AM
Gasquet and Baghdatis and Monfils are going to be really really good.

I've been picking Monfils to step it up for a while, I think phsycially he's going to be a monster. He already serves HUGE. I think Gasquet will become the full package though.

Even though Nadal is number 2 in the world right now, he doesn't have some of the shots and phsycial advantages as Monfils, Gasquet, and Baghdatis. They are better then him in some departments and that's why I think Nadal is not going to be the best Federer!
Some shots I give you, but he has not the physical advantages as Monfils , Gasquet and Baghdatis? :confused: This guy is in top condition physically - as good as you can get, imo! He may have a very taxing game for his body, but so has Monfils.
Gasquet has a game that is more effortless and efficient, but physically hes still has a lot to do!

helloworld
07-15-2006, 08:27 AM
Gasquet and Baghdatis and Monfils are going to be really really good.

I've been picking Monfils to step it up for a while, I think phsycially he's going to be a monster. He already serves HUGE. I think Gasquet will become the full package though.

Even though Nadal is number 2 in the world right now, he doesn't have some of the shots and phsycial advantages as Monfils, Gasquet, and Baghdatis. They are better then him in some departments and that's why I think Nadal is not going to be the best Federer!
LOL you're such a newbie in tennis.

Tennis_Goodness
07-15-2006, 08:38 AM
Some shots I give you, but he has not the physical advantages as Monfils , Gasquet and Baghdatis? :confused: This guy is in top condition physically - as good as you can get, imo! He may have a very taxing game for his body, but so has Monfils.
Gasquet has a game that is more effortless and efficient, but physically hes still has a lot to do!

There ground strokes seem to be a little more powerful and there serves are already better then Nadal's! I'm not saying there better then Nadal right now or physcialy in better shape, but they have some advantages that Nadal I don't think will ever have!

Monfils is what 6'4 almost 6'5 and YES height does give you something a little extra in tennis and he can serve monster serves.

punch
07-15-2006, 08:54 AM
Gasquet seems to have the shot making ability and flare, but still has a long way to go, untimately though I can see him becoming a top 5 player.

Bagdhatis is at the top of my list for up and coming players, he will be brilliant in another years time.

diegaa
07-15-2006, 09:05 AM
If Djokovic gets to number 1 in the world I quit playing or watching tennis.

y asi tal vez te pueda ganar por abandono... :p

malakas
07-15-2006, 09:07 AM
Are you kidding? If Nadal wins the US Open then I think Nadal will be in the number 1 spot.

No he won't.He will have to win the AO 2007 to become no.1.

malakas
07-15-2006, 09:09 AM
I'm pretty sure it goes to Murray or Baghdatis this year.

I agree.Marcos has improved very much this year,from out of the top 50 to top 10,and still has very few points to defend from the hardcourt season.

Rickson
07-15-2006, 09:20 AM
I know Nadal has beaten Federer a few times this year. But I don't think he will replace Federer as the top dog. Who do you guys think has the potential to dethrone Federer?
The next number 1? I don't know if he'll be the very next number 1, but I see good things for Richard Gasquet in the future. Roger took a few years on the tour to start dominating men's tennis so Gasquet might have a similar road in front of him.

helloworld
07-15-2006, 09:33 AM
Roger has always been known to be the most talented player on ATP even back when Hewitt was dominating tennis. I remember those commentators always talked about how talented Federer was. I was very surprised cuz Federer was ranked like 7 or 8, how can Mcenroe say he's the most talented player ever ??? I can understand now why Mcenroe said that. Right now I don't see any young players achieved such praise from experts, except for Nadal. There was a lot of talk about Nadal becoming the next world no.1 last year. For other youngsters like Monfils, Djokovic, Gasquet etc., i don't see any experts telling that they are the most talented ever, so i don't think any of those young guns will be the next Federer. There is some rumour though about this tennis prodigy from Australia. He's just 13 though, but in a few years I think that boy might just be what we are looking for.

Marat Safinator
07-15-2006, 09:37 AM
LOL you're such a newbie in tennis.

he cant spell either. than not then. why do people get mixed up with then and than?

Marat Safinator
07-15-2006, 09:38 AM
Evgeny Korolev is the future no.1

Dunlopkid
07-15-2006, 09:39 AM
I dont think anyone will. Nobody will ever have the record he has had from 04 to now. That would be almost impossible for any player play at such a high level as Federer. So i dont think its ever going to happen.


Quite agree.

Rickson
07-15-2006, 10:21 AM
Roger is almost 25 years old and he may not have reached his tennis peak. In powerlifting, men don't reach their peak until around 30 years old so we may not have even seen the best of Roger yet. Powerlifters start to go downhill after about 35 so it's possible that Roger might have 9 good years ahead of him. Yes, I know tennis is not powerlifting, but if he keeps it together mentally, his body might not fail him until after 35 so what this means is that we might not see a new number 1 for a very long time.

Marat Safinator
07-15-2006, 02:54 PM
power lifting is different...this is tennis.

monfils
07-15-2006, 03:05 PM
I think Monfils will be the next federer because of the way he dominated the juniors. He should have won the junior grandslam if it wasn't for injury. He would have been the only junior along with edberg to do that. He has also risen to ATP level very quickly. He has all the weapons, He is tall, Has a big serve, moves very fast around the court, he has a big forehand and his backhand is also very good. His volleys are not the best but he can still work on them. He can hit some huge groundstrokes, I have no idea why he is always holding back his shots. He can also play on all surfaces. Give this guy a few years and you will see him dominate the ATP the way he dominated the juniors.

unjugon
07-15-2006, 03:22 PM
I think Monfils will be the next federer because of the way he dominated the juniors. He should have won the junior grandslam if it wasn't for injury. He would have been the only junior along with edberg to do that. He has also risen to ATP level very quickly. He has all the weapons, He is tall, Has a big serve, moves very fast around the court, he has a big forehand and his backhand is also very good. His volleys are not the best but he can still work on them. He can hit some huge groundstrokes, I have no idea why he is always holding back his shots. He can also play on all surfaces. Give this guy a few years and you will see him dominate the ATP the way he dominated the juniors.
This is interesting, I never knew he dominated juniors so easily.

monfils
07-15-2006, 03:53 PM
This is interesting, I never knew he dominated juniors so easily.

He only lost two matches in 2004. He was like the federer of the juniors. He was virtually unbeatable unlike some of these other guys such as Njokovic, bagdhatis and Murray. He won Australian open without droping a set, Won French only droping one set and Won Wimbledon only droping one set. He was injured during the US open and lost in the 3rd round. Non of these guys dominated the juniors the way Monfils did. Thats why i think that when he matures he can become the next Federer. He has got huge groundstrokes, he could probably hit it as hard as anybody if not harder. When he played Federer in the finals of Doha Federer could barely hit a single ball past him. Even James Blake said he was the fastest guy on the tour. Some people do not think he has that much potential because they know very little about him.
Many have not seen him play. I have seen him play and i have definitely seen what he can do.

sureshs
07-15-2006, 04:14 PM
You are quite correct that Nadal is not the next Federer; he's the first Nadal. As Brad Gilbert said last year, at some point people will be looking at who is the next Nadal.

And I do think Nadal will replace Federer as top dog at some point.

I don't see anyone else out there being able to do it.

Federer is not the first Federer - he is the next Sampras, and Sampras was the next Laver.

Nadal is the next Vilas or the next Muster or the next Borg.

Athletes are getting bigger, better and faster all the time, giving the impression they are the first. All Olympic records seem to get broken. A number of factors are responsible - more money, more training facilities, drawing from the past, more comfortable parents who they need not take care of, etc. It doesn't mean they are the first - often they just do what was done before but at the next level.

nadalgirl26
07-15-2006, 04:19 PM
Why would anyone want to be the next loserw ho won a bunch of slams against other players that sucks like Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, grandpa Agassi, and other crummy players and gets humilated and raped by the first really good players he plays like my Nadal.

Raistlin
07-15-2006, 05:21 PM
As much as I hate the crap out of Nadal I have to say that he's the only person I can see who stand a chance against Federer (though I don't think it'll be happening anytime soon). The rest of the players on tour just don't have the mentality to beat Federer. I mean Fed's only loses this year came to Rafael so that says something.

I'm happy for Nadal because if it wasn't for him Roger would be rampaging through the ATP circuit with no one there with enough balls to pull his breaks. Nadal is still like 2000+ points behind Federer though. And indeed he IS the first Nadal.

edberg505
07-15-2006, 05:30 PM
Why would anyone want to be the next loserw ho won a bunch of slams against other players that sucks like Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, grandpa Agassi, and other crummy players and gets humilated and raped by the first really good players he plays like my Nadal.

Well, he beat James Blake, the crummy player that owns Nadal. and of course Nadal hasn't even played Safin, and retired in his last match against Hewitt. And don't gimme that crap about he was beating Hewitt before he retired. A LOSS is a LOSS!!!!

nadalgirl26
07-15-2006, 05:32 PM
Nadal peed all over hewitt at the French Open and was beating him in Queens Club tournametn until being injured. Hewitt has yet to prove anything vs Nadal since before Nadal become dominant player.

malakas
07-15-2006, 05:38 PM
Nadal has also yet to play Nalbandian I think.

Raistlin
07-15-2006, 05:40 PM
Nadal peed all over hewitt at the French Open and was beating him in Queens Club tournametn until being injured. Hewitt has yet to prove anything vs Nadal since before Nadal become dominant player.

LOL!

Did anyone watch at Nadal's match at wimbledon and realize that the sand beneath his feet was starting to levitate around him. It's like if he has clay court powers wherever he go:o

edberg505
07-15-2006, 05:40 PM
Nadal peed all over hewitt at the French Open and was beating him in Queens Club tournametn until being injured. Hewitt has yet to prove anything vs Nadal since before Nadal become dominant player.


I repeat, Nadal lost his last match against Hewitt! You can dress it up anyway you want. The bottom line is Nadal did not win!!!!!

uxnaitoahz
07-16-2006, 01:17 PM
Why would anyone want to be the next loserw ho won a bunch of slams against other players that sucks like Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, grandpa Agassi, and other crummy players and gets humilated and raped by the first really good players he plays like my Nadal.

NADAL IS GOOD.
NADAL IS NOT GOD.
NADAL WILL NOT OVERCOME FEDERER ANYTIME SOON.
GET OVER IT.

madhatter911
07-16-2006, 03:10 PM
monfils or gasquet. i have seen both play and you wait and see they are very talented. Monfils dominated as a junior and gasquet was a french prodigee at the age of 11 he was on his first tennis cover using his beautiful backhand. just watch.

NamRanger
07-16-2006, 03:20 PM
You are quite correct that Nadal is not the next Federer; he's the first Nadal. As Brad Gilbert said last year, at some point people will be looking at who is the next Nadal.

And I do think Nadal will replace Federer as top dog at some point.

I don't see anyone else out there being able to do it.



His career will be cut short by injuries, 100% garunteed.

psamp14
07-16-2006, 03:30 PM
it is almost impossible to determine who will be the next federer...so i will just keep saying...13 yr old bernard tomic...because of his unbelievable record (i think 76 tournament titles and 5 or 6 runner ups, and just 1 qtrfinal) and 4 straight ITF titles, competing with players who are 17-18

stoneagle
07-16-2006, 03:55 PM
if nadal and federer are both 20 yrs old,
federer is not even #2 behind nadal.
the only reason federer has more points than
nadal is, because federer is 4 yrs older and has
accumulated ahead of points than nadal.

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 04:53 PM
His career will be cut short by injuries, 100% garunteed.

Perhaps, but by then, he will have done more than 99.9% of the Tour does in a much longer career.

Whenever I see these predictions of doom, it reminds me of a quote by Shelby from Steel Magnolias: "I would rather have 30 minutes of something wonderful rather than a lifetime of nothing special."

Rafa's career will be the former, and that cannot be said of most guys who have swung a racquet on the ATP.

slice bh compliment
07-16-2006, 05:06 PM
The next Federer huh? Hmm, I'm still trying to enjoy this Federer, but okay, I'll bite...it is fun to make bold predictions with a degree of certainty.

I will go with the most obvious answer.
The next Federer is not yet born.
Roger and Mirka will have a child in 2010. Her name will be Rafaella, and she will have her dad's hair, her mother's body type and beautiful skin.

Now go enjoy one of her dad's matches....then go play tennis! It's what I did after church this afternoon...and I'd recommend it to anybody/everybody. Then I came home and watched Gimel and Coetzee play dubs against Kendrick and Melzer. Wish I had seen more of the first set.

Marat Safinator
07-16-2006, 05:07 PM
nadal is a pig.

uxnaitoahz
07-16-2006, 06:06 PM
nadal is a pig.

hahaha...

127mph
07-16-2006, 08:14 PM
Which player right now has more flair and shotmaking ability than Gasquet -other than Federer??
marat safin

127mph
07-16-2006, 08:15 PM
His career will be cut short by injuries, 100% garunteed.

yea i mean hes hurting his hand for christ sake

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 08:23 PM
yea i mean hes hurting his hand for christ sake

SO he's taking a bit of time off to correct "injury." You have a problem with that?

Or should he play through the injury and make sure his career is even shorter? *rollseyes*

uxnaitoahz
07-16-2006, 08:59 PM
SO he's taking a bit of time off to correct "injury." You have a problem with that?

Or should he play through the injury and make sure his career is even shorter? *rollseyes*

Okay let's see just how good Nadal really is. Below are some of the big names in tennis, lets see how they compare with Nadal...

Nadal 6-2 Federer (clay, clay, clay...)
Nadal 0-0 Nalbandian (hmmm interesting)
Nadal 0-2 Blake (WHAT?! Nadal has a losing record against Blake?)
Nadal 1-1 Roddick (Tied with Roddick...)
Nadal 1-4 Hewitt (LOL, I think I recall some Nadal fan saying that Nadal "peed all over Hewitt")
Nadal 0-0 Safin (Never faced Safin?)

Nadal isn't that great. DEAL WITH IT. HE IS GOOD ON CLAY. HE IS A GOOD FIGHTER. BUT HE IS NOT GOD. You crazy Nadal fans need to wake up.

Swissv2
07-16-2006, 09:09 PM
nadalgirl26, nadal -> peeing on someone? ewww. sounds kinda ....*no comments* :neutral:

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 09:41 PM
Nadal 6-2 Federer (clay, clay, clay...)

Two of those wins were on hardcourts, Dubai and Miami. Please do your research.

Nadal 0-0 Nalbandian (hmmm interesting)

Not so interesting. Rafa has 17 career titles to date to Nalbandian's 5. And unlike, Nalbandian, Rafa who has just turned 20, has majors and Masters titles. David has none -- the Masters Cup doesn't count as a Masters title. And the both are now Wimbledon finalists.

Nadal 0-2 Blake (WHAT?! Nadal has a losing record against Blake?)

Yep he does, both on hardcourts. Both times James played his best tennis, and Rafa didn't. James deserved to win, but then was unable to get the job done later in the tournament. Another reason why Rafa has 17 titles to James's 5. Even though Rafa just turned 20. Unike Rafa, Blake cannot beat Federer.

Nadal 1-1 Roddick (Tied with Roddick...)

Irrelevant. Roddick is struggling against anyone these days. He'll have to work a bit harder to get a chance at the No. 2 seed.

Nadal 1-4 Hewitt (LOL, I think I recall some Nadal fan saying that Nadal "peed all over Hewitt")

He didn't, but he won pretty comfortably on clay this year. He took a set off Hewitt at Queen's, and I thought they would have a dynamite semi at Wimbledon, but Baghdatis rolled over Hewitt. And Rafa did pretty much the same against Bags. Other than that, the head-to-heads between Rafa ahd Hewitt are hard to call, as they were close matches, but before Rafa had done anything significant.

Nadal 0-0 Safin (Never faced Safin?)

See Nalbandian, supra. Same deal. Safin has either been injured or hasn't produced the goods to face Nadal. Indeed, Safin hasn't faced anyone good lately, or done anything good lately. Sorry, but it's the truth, and to put him in the same category as Nadal right now doesn't say much about your logic.

And part of the problem with your logic is that that you assume Rafa has been on Tour as long as the Federers, Hewitts, Safins, Nalbandians, etc. He hasn't. He just turned 20. They are mid-20's. He had to battle them on his way up, and it's a bit surprising he didn't face them more. But again, he's just starting, some of them likely are peaking.

What says more is that he is facing Federer on a regular basis on Sundays. Where are those other guys?

Nadal isn't that great. DEAL WITH IT. HE IS GOOD ON CLAY. HE IS A GOOD FIGHTER. BUT HE IS NOT GOD. You crazy Nadal fans need to wake up.

Perhaps he isn't that great, but he's better than anyone else out there at the moment on a regular basis. And even has his moments against the No. 1 player. Does anyone else?

No. So DEAL WITH IT. ;-)

edberg505
07-16-2006, 09:56 PM
Yep he does, both on hardcourts. Both times James played his best tennis, and Rafa didn't. James deserved to win, but then was unable to get the job done later in the tournament. Another reason why Rafa has 17 titles to James's 5. Even though Rafa just turned 20. Unike Rafa, Blake cannot beat Federer.



I still don't get this. It seems as if no one wants to give Blake credit for what he has done. Nadal played bad? And what is it in those stats from both of those matches that makes you say that? He has a 10ft clearance above the net so he cleary didn't hit a buch of unforced errors. Of course james played great but you can't exactly play like crap and beat Nadal. What I saw was James Blake hit Nadal off the court, plain and simple. And there wasn't anything in Nadal's play that had to do with his loss. I mean what could have Nadal done better, run down more balls? Kinda hard to do when you have 90 MPH forehands coming at you?

sandiegotennisboy
07-16-2006, 10:00 PM
Okay let's see just how good Nadal really is. Below are some of the big names in tennis, lets see how they compare with Nadal...

Nadal 6-2 Federer (clay, clay, clay...)
Nadal 0-0 Nalbandian (hmmm interesting)
Nadal 0-2 Blake (WHAT?! Nadal has a losing record against Blake?)
Nadal 1-1 Roddick (Tied with Roddick...)
Nadal 1-4 Hewitt (LOL, I think I recall some Nadal fan saying that Nadal "peed all over Hewitt")
Nadal 0-0 Safin (Never faced Safin?)

Nadal isn't that great. DEAL WITH IT. HE IS GOOD ON CLAY. HE IS A GOOD FIGHTER. BUT HE IS NOT GOD. You crazy Nadal fans need to wake up.

oh my god you just shattered the little bit of sanity they had left. i cant believe noone has posted his results against everyone else before. Man-rantxa is a total clay courter and everyone knows it. He will never repeat that wimbledon final unless half the tour dies from a plane crash.

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 10:08 PM
I still don't get this. It seems as if no one wants to give Blake credit for what he has done. Nadal played bad? And what is it in those stats from both of those matches that makes you say that? He has a 10ft clearance above the net so he cleary didn't hit a buch of unforced errors. Of course james played great but you can't exactly play like crap and beat Nadal. What I saw was James Blake hit Nadal off the court, plain and simple. And there wasn't anything in Nadal's play that had to do with his loss. I mean what could have Nadal done better, run down more balls? Kinda hard to do when you have 90 MPH forehands coming at you?

What I saw, Edberg, is guy who had a real chance to beat Federer in the final at IW, and didn't have the guts, or the balls to do it.

He outplayed Rafa. I said that. In fact, he was playing the best tennis of any one in the tournament, Federer included.

But he gets to the final, and he starts out great, and then folds like a cheap card table.

But he didn't BELIEVE. And that's why I downplay what James has done, because if he was the real deal he would have a big title by now, and he doesn't.

Rafa has them, Federer has them. Blake doesn't. Blake can get one, but I'm not sure he has the ability.

Untill he does, you can't dismiss the two slams and umpteen Masters titles Rafa has in favor of what James has done. One is a Hall of Famer; the other has a lot more to prove.

sandiegotennisboy
07-16-2006, 10:10 PM
What I saw, Edberg, is guy who had a real chance to beat Federer in the final at IW, and didn't have the guts, or the balls to do it.

He outplayed Rafa. I said that. In fact, he was playing the best tennis of any one in the tournament, Federer included.

But he gets to the final, and he starts out great, and then folds like a cheap card table.

But he didn't BELIEVE. And that's why I downplay what James has done, because if he was the real deal he would have a big title by now, and he doesn't.

Rafa has them, Federer has them. Blake doesn't. Blake can get one, but I'm not sure he has the ability.

Untill he does, you can't dismiss the two slams and umpteen Masters titles Rafa has in favor of what James has done. One is a Hall of Famer; the other has a lot more to prove.

i agree that blake is overrated. if you look at the big picture, he hasnt done much.

edberg505
07-16-2006, 10:16 PM
What I saw, Edberg, is guy who had a real chance to beat Federer in the final at IW, and didn't have the guts, or the balls to do it.

He outplayed Rafa. I said that. In fact, he was playing the best tennis of any one in the tournament, Federer included.

But he gets to the final, and he starts out great, and then folds like a cheap card table.

But he didn't BELIEVE. And that's why I downplay what James has done, because if he was the real deal he would have a big title by now, and he doesn't.

Rafa has them, Federer has them. Blake doesn't. Blake can get one, but I'm not sure he has the ability.

Untill he does, you can't dismiss the two slams and umpteen Masters titles Rafa has in favor of what James has done. One is a Hall of Famer; the other has a lot more to prove.

You can downplay what James has done all you want to. But it seems like to me that you were trying to excuse Nadal's losses to him by saying that Nadal played bad. Which is clearly not the case.

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 10:24 PM
You can downplay what James has done all you want to. But it seems like to me that you were trying to excuse Nadal's losses to him by saying that Nadal played bad. Which is clearly not the case.

I think Nadal played badly at the US Open. He didn't play badly at Indian Wells -- as he easily beat Bags in the quarters.

But I don't think we've seen Rafa play his best tennis against Blake. Rafa put up a battle at IW -- much better than at the USO, IMO, but James was better.

Still James lost to Federer in both IW and Miami, and if you can't beat Fed, you aren't going to win big hardcourt titles.

edberg505
07-16-2006, 10:40 PM
I think Nadal played badly at the US Open. He didn't play badly at Indian Wells -- as he easily beat Bags in the quarters.

But I don't think we've seen Rafa play his best tennis against Blake. Rafa put up a battle at IW -- much better than at the USO, IMO, but James was better.

Still James lost to Federer in both IW and Miami, and if you can't beat Fed, you aren't going to win big hardcourt titles.

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or anything. But what exactly in Nadal's match at the US Open consisted of bad play. And Nadal hasn't exactly beaten Federer for any major hardcourt titles either. Now, I'm not saying that Nadal isn't good, of course he is. You don't get to #2 in the world not being good.

VamosRafa
07-16-2006, 11:06 PM
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or anything. But what exactly in Nadal's match at the US Open consisted of bad play. And Nadal hasn't exactly beaten Federer for any major hardcourt titles either. Now, I'm not saying that Nadal isn't good, of course he is. You don't get to #2 in the world not being good.

Rafa's play going into the match was uninspired -- even Scoville Jenkins had his chances. And Rafa just wasn't Rafa in that match against James. He went into that match overdone, IMO -- something he's trying to avoid this year. Rafa was sluggish.

This doesn't take anything away from James's play in that match, which was great, but I don't think that's the best Rafa can play on hardcourts. I think we've already seen he can do better -- and certainly serve better.

That's my opinion. Maybe that's the best it will get for Rafa against James or anyone else at the US Open, but I don't think so.

Dilettante
07-16-2006, 11:12 PM
Rafa's play going into the match was uninspired -- even Scoville Jenkins had his chances. And Rafa just wasn't Rafa in that match against James. He went into that match overdone, IMO -- something he's trying to avoid this year. Rafa was sluggish.

I don't agree, I think that kind of players a la Blake just match up well against Nadal. It's like Berdych, another one who matches up well against Nadal.

Maybe Nadal wasn't in his best moment, but the way Blake (and Jenkins) played on the USO court, it's just the way that hurts Nadal the most.

Squid
07-16-2006, 11:17 PM
Why would anyone want to be the next loserw ho won a bunch of slams against other players that sucks like Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, grandpa Agassi, and other crummy players and gets humilated and raped by the first really good players he plays like my Nadal.


oh wow... i dont like getting into opinionated arguements but seeing this... how do you even have the nerve to call agassi crummy? agassi is one of the few people who have ever won the elusive career grand slam! now i know that now yeah he's old, he isnt as fast, but you have to give him credit for trying to compete with the new breed of players. i bet you that put agassi in his prime, or even 10 years ago, and he would wipe the floor with nadal.

austro
07-16-2006, 11:49 PM
It's going to be Andre Agassi's and Steffi Graf's kid!

In the meantime, Baghdatis or Nalbandian may have the potential to step into Fed's shoes if and when he lets up. That's assuming they improve too of course.

Gasquet just won Gstaad...

RiosTheGenius
07-16-2006, 11:51 PM
Djokovic, so overrated.

Baghdatis and Gasquet seem to have the best chance, but I don't think we'll see another Federer in a LONG time. It's nearly impossible to have that kind of consistency for so long.
How can such a young player be overrated?.... or rated at all having so much to mature yet???

VamosRafa
07-17-2006, 12:12 AM
I don't agree, I think that kind of players a la Blake just match up well against Nadal. It's like Berdych, another one who matches up well against Nadal.

Maybe Nadal wasn't in his best moment, but the way Blake (and Jenkins) played on the USO court, it's just the way that hurts Nadal the most.

Not so sure about Berdych. They are 1-1, with the loss being a third set TB in Cincy, where Rafa was totally knackered. After beating Agassi, Rafa came in from Montreal on the redeye, had no opportuity to practice on the Cincy courts because of the rain, and yet went out there and tried. He was awful, but even then, he had a few matchpoints. It's one of the worst matches I've ever seen Rafa play, and yet it was still fairly close. Rafa wasn't even moving around the court -- he was trying to blast winners because he was so beat.

The matches with Blake haven't been THAT close, but I think if Rafa plays the way he was at Wimbledon he'll give himself a better chance against the hardcourt specialists.

superman1
07-17-2006, 12:17 AM
Blake is only 2-0 against Nadal, but just from watching those matches you can tell that when Blake's forehand is on, there's nothing really that Nadal can do about it. He has tried everything. Even on clay I'm sure Nadal would have a hell of a tough time, just like Almagro did. At least with Nadal vs Federer you could always see that Federer had the aggressive game to take out Nadal, but undid himself with mistakes that Nadal provoked.

VamosRafa
07-17-2006, 01:01 AM
Blake is only 2-0 against Nadal, but just from watching those matches you can tell that when Blake's forehand is on, there's nothing really that Nadal can do about it. He has tried everything. Even on clay I'm sure Nadal would have a hell of a tough time, just like Almagro did. At least with Nadal vs Federer you could always see that Federer had the aggressive game to take out Nadal, but undid himself with mistakes that Nadal provoked.

I disagree that Rafa would have that much trouble with James on clay. I'm not sure we'll ever see it because they would be seeded to meet late in any claycourt event, and James is unlikely to get there.

I think you are right about Rafa having trouble when James's forehand is on -- but it isn't always "on." It will be interesting to see what happens next time they meet.

D-man
07-17-2006, 01:20 AM
i watched both blake/nadal matches with great interest. blakes game does indeed match up well with nadal, there is no denying it. but i think the real clincher... the last they met there was so much self-belief in blake’s eyes against nadal... i’d have a hard time doubting blake had a real chance on any surface...

David L
07-17-2006, 03:38 AM
What I saw, Edberg, is guy who had a real chance to beat Federer in the final at IW, and didn't have the guts, or the balls to do it.

He outplayed Rafa. I said that. In fact, he was playing the best tennis of any one in the tournament, Federer included.

But he gets to the final, and he starts out great, and then folds like a cheap card table.

But he didn't BELIEVE. And that's why I downplay what James has done, because if he was the real deal he would have a big title by now, and he doesn't.

Have you considered the possibility that Blake lost at Indian Wells because Federer was the better player? Blake believing or not may be immaterial. Federer is a hard player to beat, even if you have all the belief in the world. I don't think Blakes loss had anything to do with self belief, the score was not even close. When Federer found his form, he started to dominate. Blake played well thoughout the tournament, but he was not playing better tennis than Federer. I don't know if you play tennis, but if you do you'll know that it is very hard for a mental collapse to sustain itself across two sets, to the extent that you lose them 6-3 6-0, if you have been playing well leading up to that stage. Two sets give you ample opportunity to regroup and Blake is no Safin, he is a very focused player. For someone to beat you that convincingly when both players are into a match, they have to be playing that much better than you. You should try playing Federer, he's quite a tough player to beat.

David L
07-17-2006, 03:55 AM
Hard to see if there is another Federer on the horizon. No one springs to mind. The key I guess is to look at the potential as opposed to the results at the moment. Athleticism, hands etc. Maybe someone in the juniors we have not seen yet or maybe not.

helloworld
07-17-2006, 03:57 AM
Have you considered the possibility that Blake lost at Indian Wells because Federer was the better player? Blake believing or not may be immaterial. Federer is a hard player to beat, even if you have all the belief in the world. I don't think Blakes loss had anything to do with self belief, the score was not even close. When Federer found his form, he started to dominate. Blake played well thoughout the tournament, but he was not playing better tennis than Federer. I don't know if you play tennis, but if you do you'll know that it is very hard for a mental collapse to sustain itself across two sets, to the extent that you lose them 6-3 6-0, if you have been playing well leading up to that stage. Two sets give you ample opportunity to regroup and Blake is no Safin, he is a very focused player. For someone to beat you that convincingly when both players are into a match, they have to be playing really well. You should try playing Federer, he's quite a tough player to beat.
Tell that to Nadal. He owns Federer almost everytime they meet, except on grass of course. ;)

David L
07-17-2006, 04:23 AM
Tell that to Nadal. He owns Federer almost everytime they meet, except on grass of course. ;)

I think if you asked Nadal, he would be the first to tell you it is not easy to beat Federer. When asked recently how he was able to do it, he said Federer was the better player, but to compete with him, he had to fight, chase everything and try and drive him to despair by getting as many balls back as possible. When Nadal plays Federer, he also plays a more aggressive game than he does against other opponents, in the way that Sampras did against Agassi. He does not bring his normal game to the table, he has to do more.

FiveO
07-17-2006, 09:23 AM
At the risk of being labeled a "Fed Fanboy", I offer this:

If his name wasn't Nadal, is reaching the Final of an event on grass by beating a shell of what AA had been and 5 other players with a combined record of 5-16 at Wimbledon prior the '06 event really represent improvement?

Especially when it culminates in a match, where the match-up is described by less realistic Nadal supporters, as being decidedly one sided in Nadal's favor, and which ultimately ends in a final which is the most one sided affair they've played this year and in Federer's favor?

Nadal fans overstate the "domination" of Nadal over Federer in the four previous matches, especially in two of those four losses Federer actually won the majority of the points played. Beyond that Nadal's half of the draw at this year's Wimbledon was great to start with and then proceeded to collapse. Then centre court played like concrete in the final.

None of this is Nadal's fault, but in any of his first six matches did Nadal enter as the underdog? If he did just name the guy. Yes, Nadal reached the final and has the 2nd place platter to prove it but where was this marked improvement or big upset to warrant praise for the result? He beat 3 guys who would have to qualify for 32 and 64 draw year round events, 2 others ranked well below him with LESS grass results than even he had coming in and a shell of a legend, who played a grand total of 4 events and had a 4-4 record this year. Point out which match showed this marked improvement. Name the on form grass courter you would count as a good win. Name the on form fast courter he beat. That name is not there. I guess beating guys you are clearly better than when none are on a surface they had any success on in the past is improvement to some, I just don't see it.

According to you guys Fed's four losses this year came against the "superior" player. In actuality, being #1 any Fed loss is a "bad" loss, but all were to the #2 player in the world. On the other hand in contrast to Nadal's four good wins his losses this year have come at the hands of (in order) the #65 Clement, #14 Blake, #35 Moya, #13 Hewitt and now (an inferior) #1.

The assessments of Nadal's results as compared to Fed appear awfully one sided in other ways. They never mention Fed's improvements this year. He has eliminated any losses to anyone else to date, improved his results at the AO and on clay, actually beating players who excel on that surface to validate such improvements and is ahead of his pace from last year on points.

Nadal is improving overall, no doubt. But so is Federer. While I do believe that certain elements in Nadal's game, being left handed, having the ability to attack dtl into Fed's fh and the ability to get the ball up, way up into the Fed bh, will continue to make Nadal more problematic for Fed than other potential opponents, there is no acknowledgement that Fed has shown an almost unwavering ability to overcome guys who once beat him or troubled him regularly, i.e. Mirnyi, Hewitt, Henman, Grosjean, Keifer, etc..

I still believe that Nadal's second best chance at a major will come in January at the AO. He has yet to prove he is not vulnerable to lower ranked players who excel on fast courts and IMO didn't prove anything on grass other than Fed still merits being ranked above him.

emcee
07-17-2006, 11:14 AM
Nadal is not the next Federer, Nadal is the next Nadal

Wow this is the dumbest post I've ever seen. Nadal is the first Nadal.

helloworld
07-17-2006, 11:21 AM
Wow this is the dumbest post I've ever seen. Nadal is the first Nadal.
Why did you call him stupid ? Did you have a tough childhood life or something ? Did your bullies at school picked on you by calling you a dumb ass?

uxnaitoahz
07-17-2006, 12:34 PM
You can praise Nadal all you want, but the point of the matter is that Nadal will not overcome Federer. At this rate and his current style, he will be either be exhausted or seriously injured. No one can keep that up forever. He can run all he wants while his legs are still fresh, but wait till the day he can't and Federer is going to work him so hard that he is going to want to quit tennis before losing his dignity.

Game, Set, Match... Mr. Federer

So now that Nadal is out of the question any other ideas on who the next top dog is?

uxnaitoahz
07-17-2006, 12:36 PM
Oh yeah, he injured his left hand and pulled out of the Mercedes Cup.

VamosRafa
07-17-2006, 04:30 PM
So as Fedfans (I mean people) wait for others to try to dethrone Federer, they still BELIEVE that Rafa is a fluke, and there's another savior there . . .

Darn, they just missed the boat. As Nadal I is going to continue to sail by and attack Federer I no matter what they or anyone else on the Tour thinks.

And good on him, as tennis needs him right about now.

Let's see if there are any pirates who can attack either of them. :D

VamosRafa
07-17-2006, 04:31 PM
Oh yeah, he injured his left hand and pulled out of the Mercedes Cup.

Again, swamp land in Florida is always available for a very good price. :D

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
07-17-2006, 04:32 PM
Roddick will dethrone him, at the USO this year once he gets his confidence back.

-k-

VamosRafa
07-17-2006, 04:34 PM
Roddick will dethrone him, at the USO this year once he gets his confidence back.

-k-

Man, swamp land in Florida must be going for 3 dollars an acre. :D

But, hey, stranger things have happened.

uxnaitoahz
07-17-2006, 04:37 PM
I actually want Roddick to win. FedEx took 2 Wimbys away from him... It must be devastating. Let's hope A-Rod finds his mojo and potentially give Federer a run for his money. :mrgreen: