Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by nikdom, Jan 16, 2013.
That describes Federer from 2004-2006.
Who cares? The dominant players at USO post 2009 (other than Rafa himself) were Djoko and Murray. And Nadal did have to beat Djoko in the final.
Nikdom's still a whippersnapper. Let him talk.
Nadal would have CRUSHED Roger at Flushing that year. Please.
Nadal was peaking there. His serve was a beast, and he was ultra aggressive.. Fed wouldn't have stood a chance
You're either very forgetful or trolling.
Nadal has the "super serve" not just for USO, but for tourneys after as well, his serve helped him a lot in Tokyo as well. But the problem is that it messed up his shoulder so he reverted to his more traditional serve by AO 2011. So that serve wasn't in effect for 2 weeks but all throughout the autumn season.
Heck, there were some signs of the super serve before:
In a match that he LOST, in Cincy.
Even if you believe the "Nadal doped to get that serve" theory(that is what you seem to be implying), then I ask you: Why didn't Nadal just cycle again anytime in the next 2 years to get that booming serve? Nadal never served that well again, except maybe the first set in WB 2011 final.
Heck, even resident silent ban aficionado and expert drakulie doesn't believe Nadal doped to get that serve and yet some of you do. Boggles the mind.
Really? where do you guys get this crap? Uncle Toni?
1 min this guy is serving bombs, next day his shoulder is messed up. One day he's running around like a rabbit, the next day he's retired because his knee's are shattered?
Gimme a break. This guy has to be the most impressive athlete since Lance Armstrong. You know how that guy did it right...
eh, what ? federer faced djoker more times in slams than rafa did ... 10 times since montreal 2007 in fact ... rafa only faced him 6 times since then ...
and you missed that federer also dealt with younger nadal, roddick, older agassi
eh,no , not necessarily.... One would anyday face murray in the AO 2011 final or soderling in the RG 2010 final rather than tsonga in AO 2008 final or gonzalez in AO 2007 final ( or going a bit further back : safin in the USO 2000 final or hewitt in the USO 2001 final )
and again, djoker in the 2010 USO final was clearly better than soderling in RG 2009 final , but delpo in the FO 2009 SF was clearly better than djoker in the USO 2010 final , it's a no contest IMO ...
You need to get your facts straight.
Not the next day but a couple of months later. Nadal had a improved serve(for most of the time, in some matches that autumn it did not click) in 2010 for USO, Bangkok,Tokio,Shangai and TMC(where he made his first final by beating guys like Murray,Roddick,Djokovic on HC indoors). In AO 2011 he dialed back on his serve from what I'd seen.
But still, let's assert that Nadal DOPED to get his serve for USO 2010 since that's what you are implying and he didn't actually have shoulder issues towards the end of the year.
It stands to reason that he would whip out the massive serve again at least ONCE since autumn 2010 but 2 YEARS(years in which Nadal reached another 5 slam finals) have passed and we haven't seen Nadal try to hit bombs again, it's still mostly his spin serve out wide with a slower speed.
Now I don't know about you but if I had the ability to get a powerful serve with the use of PED I would use as frequently as possible. And since the Federer warehouse has already established that Nadal is an all around awful person,a cheater of the highest magnitude, I don't see why he wouldn't use PED's to boost his serve as much as is humanly possible on a frequent basis.
I know I'm just bashing my head against the walls here trying to argue with a hater but just to know how off track you are again: drakulie, a fellow Nadal hater who believe that Nadal was already silently banned twice for doping, doesn't believe the super serve via PED theory. Why don't you have a talk with him about the Nadal super serve's appearance and disappearance?
^^ Your reasoning is as convoluted as Nadal's excuses are unconvincing.
For someone who you guys believe is the strongest, best, invincible player of all time, from your very own conclusions seems an incredibly fragile fellow.
I say no one fluctuates between invincible and disabled without some serious 'boosting'
All I ask is that you answer my not at all convoluted question:
If Nadal has a booming serve in his backpocket via PED, why doesn't he whip it out at every slam at least?
We know that you and other worthy posters have correctly identified Nadal as a cheater who pisses on the system and who is also backed from the inside(silent bans to cover up, Tony's influence, Mallorcan Mafia etc.) so why would he have qualms about pushing the super serve in our faces every other tournament?
For a guy with Nadal's(lack of)morals, it wouldn't make sense to ditch a superweapon. Did Nadal stop taking shady MTO's? Did Nadal stop wasting time? Did Nadal stop coaching? Then why did Nadal stop using PED's on his super serve? The dude is backed by the system, the fans and media are gullible enough to buy his crap(grip change, yeah right ) and yet he chooses to abandon a MAJOR weapon? Makes no sense.
It'll be too obvious if he uses that trick everytime. He wanted one USO to his name to complete the career slam and he pulled out all stops! satisfied?
It will also be more obvious if it is only a one time thing.
A guy with no morals like Nadal would have no problem using a superserve(fueled by PED) constantly. Did he stop his other nefarious antics over time? Why would he bring something new to the cheating table only to take it off after 2 months or so?
Also, why just ONCE if it is an option? Ok, it was the career slam but are you telling me that Nadal would shy away from using a superserve at say WB 2011, USO 2011, AO 2012, especially when he was getting beat ragged by Djokovic? If that's not a time to pull out all the(cheating) stops, I don't know what is. We all know that Nadal wants to do ANYTHING to get close to Fed's GS count and displacing Djokovic would have been FAR EASIER with that superserve. He could have been sitting on 14 slams now instead of 11.
Are you telling me that Nadal grew a conscience after USO 2010?
^^ too long, didn't read. I made my point already.
I'll never understand this very selective view of Fed's competition people seem to have, Baggy? Seriously? Fed played him like two times in slams?
Fed's main competition during his peak years were Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, older Agassi (though keep in mind this is the guy who won the bulk of his slams at the age of 29+), pre prime Nadal (Fed faced him in 3 slam finals) and yes Nalbo as well.
However if we concentrate on slam meetings alone then Novak is bigger competition for Fed than Nadal given the number of slam meetings and he also played Murray in 3 slam finals.
It seems Nadal, Novak and Murray are considered to be Fed's rivals only when it comes to their winning (likely soon to be in Novak's case as well)H2H against him and how it "tarnishes" his career (having a losing H2H against his "main" rivals) but when it comes to analyzing the strength of Fed's competition people bring up Bagdathis and Gonzales which doesn't really make all that sense when put together.
2010 USO was only Novak's 2nd slam final after 2+ years of pause, he was also having a relatively mediocre year with no wins against top 10 (and only Dubai to his name IIRC) until that USO match against Fed, no masters final, having issues with his serve, heck he was close to getting knocked out by his pigeon Troicki in that USO tourney.
You can put it down to bias but yes I agree with Abmk that Delpo in 2009 FO SF played better than Novak did in 2010 USO final.
Well yes, there's no arguing about that but it's not like those tourneys happened 30 years ago so all we have to go on are statistics, people remember them and have a subjective view.
Every fanbase here is is into 1.0/2.0 business, they just might use different terms (peak, prime, baby, old etc.).
Agree, though given how he's such a monster compared to Fed's competition in 2004-2007 I would have expected him to win more than one set combined in his 3 slam finals against the weak era benefactor Fed.
That said, I do expect him to beat Fed in a slam in the near future and as a consequence be included in "strong era" talks more often (with our local experts given well informed predictions of Fed's hypothetical slam count had he been the same age as 3 giants of the game).
That is true and given how great Nadal was playing in 2010 USO (on the level of multiple USO champions IMO) I have no doubt he could have won it with a tougher (or any at that moment basically) draw.
That said, Fed displayed more consistency at FO than Nadal did in any HC slam so far, actually the first time Nadal reached 2 HC slam finals in a row was during his massive decline in 2011-2012 . Of course, how much you value consistency is subjective.
Actually, his (Namelessone's) logic is sound.
If Nadal "cheated" to get his career slam with his superserve why the heck wouldn't he do the same in 2011 when he was having major issues with improved Novak? What stopped him from "pulling all stops" to counter Novak's game, his guilty conscience? Heck I'm sure Nadal would have loved to get closer to Fed's slam count (or Pete's at the very least) in 2011-2012.
I agree with everything you say. It's silly to suggest that Rafa used PED serve only in US Open 2010. If he used PED and succeeded in that why wouldn't he do that in 2011?
Every player should be considered innocent untill caught. If we are to make allegations we can raise that against any player.
I agree with what you've said but the point I was making about Nadals 2010 'fluke win' was that certainly I can find at least one Federer slam draw that compares . As far as Noles mediocr performance in USO 2010, I think we all know this AFTER THE FACT but he at the time he was still the no 3 player in the world and someone who hammered Nadal on hard courts. If he didn't actually play to his potential does that make the draw weaker. Should the strength of the draw also factor in whether the player played to his potential because we should discount the FO 08 win as well since Fed played pretty poorly in that one. Or AO 2010 final since Murray played like deal in the final.
Was Fed closer to an FO than Nadal was to a USO? yes. But that's like saying Murray never made a USO final until 2012 so his win is more flukey.
yeah, only nadal has beaten federer @ the FO on other occasions .. AO 2010 final, murray actually played decent tennis ( unlike USO 2008 final or AO 2011 final )
tbh, there should be no "discounting" of any slam win in any full or near full field ... but when some rafa ****s say fed's win @ FO 2009 doesn't count or something like that because he didn't face nadal, its laughable, because federer had a much tougher draw in FO 2009 than rafa did in USO 2010 ( even if rafa was capable of winning with a tougher draw , fact is he had relatively easy )
actually, murray had made the final of the USO in 2008 .....
I would say that while 2010 was clearly Djokovic's worst year, and that he wasn't playing well in the USOpen, he was still playing better than Federer in that event, if only with a thin margin. It might be that , if he had won that SF, Federer would have dramatically increased his level in the final, but it is unlikely. And if he played Nadal in the final with the level he showed in the SF, he would certainly have been beaten.
I think Djokovic played ok in the semis and finals but I don't think he was playing as badly as people suggest. Here was his 2010 US open performance
R128 Viktor Troicki (SRB) 47 W 6-3, 3-6, 2-6, 7-5, 6-3
R64 Philipp Petzschner (GER) 52 W 7-5, 6-3, 7-6(6)
R32 James Blake (USA) 108 W 6-1, 7-6(4), 6-3
R16 Mardy Fish (USA) 21 W 6-3, 6-4, 6-1
Q Gael Monfils (FRA) 19 W 7-6(2), 6-1, 6-2
S Roger Federer (SUI) 2 W 5-7, 6-1, 5-7, 6-2, 7-5
F Rafael Nadal (ESP) 1 L 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 2-6
Outside of the 1st round against Troicki, I think he played quite ok. Straight sets all the way until he played Federer. And in the Fed match, he actually had some periods of pretty good play, especially in that 4th set.
I'm a Nole fan along with a Nadal fan and I think most would agree that Nole did not play USO 10 at the level he played some of his 2011 matches.However that does not take away from the fact that even a sub peak Nole is tougher to beat than 99% of the tour.
It is not really his performance at the USOpen which matter, but his performance all year long. He beated nobody until the USOpen, and nobody after it. Except Federer, he had to wait until the WTF to beat over top 10 players. That's poor...Apart Dubai, he didn't reached a single final...that's poor too.
Nole did show signs of improvement that foreshadowed the USO and 2011 in the 2010 Canada Semi vs. Fed. I was at that match and Fed completely hammered him in the 1st set, but Nole made a really gritty comeback in the 2nd and pushed it to the final games of the 3rd set. It was a really high level match that took most by surprise because at one point it looked like Fed was going to win in straight sets in less than an hour.
Nole's year before that was no doubt very mediocore, but that shows his USO performance and victory over Fed were not completely out of the blue. Both the Canada Semi and the USO Semi were very similar 50/50 matches only with different players winning the key points in the last set.
I have no doubt about it, all players have their fair share of easy, medium and hard draws.
Besides, Nadal was playing great tennis in 2010 USO, it may have been a one off performance in terms of level of play (which you could also say about his 2008 FO or Fed's 2007 AO for example) but he also reached SF the year before and reached his 2nd final in a row in 2011 so I certainly wouldn't call it a fluke either way.
Also, keep in mind that this thread was clearly made in retaliation to Smoledman's thread about 2009 Fed's FO being hollow (or some such nonsense) so I doubt it was that well thought out.
Definitely disagree with this, he was having a very mediocre year, didn't reach a slam final in 2+ years and barely scrambled past nervous Fed (who from what I've seen was trying to conserve energy, was calculating at certain points of the match which is incredibly risky to do in a slam SF) in the SF while Nadal was playing arguably the best HC tennis of his life, I fully expected Nadal to hammer him in the final and was pleasantly surprised Novak managed to take a set (I actually think Novak raised his level in the final quite a bit compared to the rest of the tourney).
Well, when analyzing the strength of the draw, ideally one should take all factors in consideration, current form, match-ups (yes, they do exist despite what some Nadal/Sampras fans say) and yes past achievements as well.
Well, no one was stopping Nadal in 2008 FO so that's one case where I think the draw was largely irrelevant concerning the eventual winner of the tourney.
Regarding Murray, he's a specific case, I'm pretty sure even most of his fans would agree that he was playing some of his best HC tennis leading into 2010 AO final but obviously at the time Murray's performances in slam finals were still atleast a level below his performance during the rest of the tourney (in stark contrast to Fed, Nadal and other all-time tennis greats who raised their level for slam finals).
I also don't agree with discounting slam titles in principle.
I didn't say Fed was closer, just more consistent and/or better against the field, I viewed Nadal's chances of winning a HC slam at say end of 2008 about as equal as I've ever thought Fed was going to win FO since 2005.
I'd actually say that his 2010 USO was not at the level of the vast majority of his 2011 matches save for the post USO part of the season when he was just burned out.
Separate names with a comma.