For people who disagree with me

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by joy, Jul 3, 2006.

  1. joy

    joy New User

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2005
    Messages:
    71
    #1
  2. chess9

    chess9 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,274
    Location:
    1.d4
    I made most of the same points in a post earlier. But, not this year. Nadal isn't ready...yet. Beating Kendrick WAS huge for Nadal though. Kendrick was, what, two points away from winning? Maybe it was really Kendrick who played awesome and Nadal who just scraped by? How do we know? Agassi really didn't show too much, IMHO. I love Andre, but he's a bit over the hill. Nadal could be his kid!

    Anyway, the problem with such analyses is they go too far. You don't become a grass court phenom overnight and beat a guy with Federer's record on grass. In fact, I don't expect Nadal to make it to the final, but we'll see.

    -Robert
     
    #2
  3. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    As a seeded player, you get a draw like this once in a lifetime, if you're lucky. Nadal was in the semis of this tournament before it even started, as there is not a single competent player in his entire quarter. Anything less than that, and it goes down as an even more embarrassing and humiliating effort than the US Open where he wept like a little girl facing Roddick's serve.

    Facing down Kendrick is something to be proud of for a college player. Not for the #2 in the world. Bogdanovic barely registers as a professional. Agassi has already retired, didn't want to be there, and could barely walk. Labadze is a fatass and has never been especially good. Tursunov is a nobody, and Nieminen is a career curtain-jerker.

    The "luck of the draw" took on a whole new aspect here. Not a single one of the 20 or more best players ended up in Nadal's quarter. Good for him, to be sure, but nothing to be proud of for waltzing through a draw a talented woman would have a chance of advancing through.

    By the end of Wimbledon, he will have achieved something by improving his performance over last year, which is really all you can ask of the kid. But he won't have accomplished anything, unless he's in the finals or better, because he simply doesn't face any legitimate professional competition till that stage.

    An embarrassment for Wimbledon, to be sure.
     
    #3
  4. HollerOne5

    HollerOne5 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    644
    Oh please, everyone on these boards didn't think Rafa would make the second week because he was supposedly so bad on grass and would lose to any marginal player. Obviously this is not the case, but you can't assume he is going to get to the semi's yet. There are still dangerous players, and nothing is a given for him on grass.
     
    #4
  5. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,791
    Location:
    Greece
    Exactly.

    Then..who is somebody for you Grimjack?Who should Nadal win,for you to say that he has accomplished something?Federer?:rolleyes:
     
    #5
  6. johnkidd

    johnkidd Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    725
    I was impressed how he cranked it up a level when he was down in the tie-break to Agassi. If he somehow gets to the and plays Fed you have to wonder if Fed will start have some self-doubt issues because this guy #1 wans't supposed to be here and #2 has taken my best shots in the past and beat me.

    It will be an interesting final week
     
    #6
  7. chess9

    chess9 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,274
    Location:
    1.d4
    Although Grimjack's post is a bit much with the hyperbole, his essential thesis is correct: Nadal has a dream draw. Before the draw who would have thought he'd be so lucky?

    If Kendrick IS as bad as Grimjack paints him, then Nadal will lose in the quarters. But, I don't think Kendrick is the hack Grimjack thinks he is. :)

    -Robert
     
    #7

Share This Page