If Nadal wins the US open will Federer retire the way Borg did?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by The Pusher Terminator, Jun 12, 2006.

  1. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    History really has been repeating itself. Borg retired after Mcenroe beat him at Wimbledon and then also won the US open. If Nadal should win the US open then Fed,.... at the age of 24 will be in almost the exact same position Borg was in at the age of 26. The question however is what do you think Fed would do? Will he retire?

    Will he retire?
     
    #1
  2. Fedexeon

    Fedexeon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    1,950
    No, he will continue to train harder than ever.
    Anyway, i'm not him, i wont know what he thinks.
    Mostly, i would say he wont.
     
    #2
  3. Rhino

    Rhino Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    7,481
    Location:
    South of London, west of Moscow
    Hang on aren't Blake, Moya, Berdych, and Clement playing at the US Open this year? :)
     
    #3
  4. mfa81

    mfa81 New User

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    No, Federer will continue at tour, there are no reason to retire...
     
    #4
  5. oscar_2424

    oscar_2424 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,239
    Location:
    Hallandale, Florida
    I agree with you
     
    #5
  6. Count Grishnackh

    Count Grishnackh Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Messages:
    397
    Work harder? You talking about Fed here? He sure didn't work hard yesterday.
     
    #6
  7. Count Grishnackh

    Count Grishnackh Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Messages:
    397
    I think if he lost to Nadal at this year's US Open final and next year's Australian Open final he would most likely either retire or start to lose to other players from being so distraught, his game would suffer because he knows he can't beat him. Then comes the retirement ala Hingis. "Oh my ankle is bothering me. I swear!"
     
    #7
  8. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    now why he would do such a thing? did roddick or hewitt retired when they were crushed by fed?
    No way.
     
    #8
  9. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    I think Roddick and hewitt have shown way more fire than Fed ever has. Rogers personality seems more on par with Borg's personality.
     
    #9
  10. johnkidd

    johnkidd Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    725
    I'm not slamming Nadal and I'm not a huge Fed fan, but to say Fed should retire is a joke. I know Pusher is out there trying to rile people up the way he did on the Borg thread. My suggestion to PT is he watch and maybe play a bit more tennis and less time hacking on a computer making uniformed posts.

    I saw Nadal play Berdych in Cin'ti last summer when he lost and Nadal's game has holes in it that clay hides. His first and second serve is weak on hardcourts. In fact he doubled twice in the third set tie-break. Berdych was also getting treatment for cramps and Nadal still couldn't put him away. I believe though as he gets more experience he'll learn to go for a bigger first serve to get some easy points. He's also got to learn to flatten his strokes out more. His topspin was bouncing up right into Berdych's wheelhouse. I also believe this is the same reason that Blake has sucess against him on hardcourt because he gets a high ball to tee off on. When Roddick beat him a couple years back at the Open it was the same thing.
    I think the reason Nadal plays Fed tough on hardcourts is that Roger tends to hit his winners by setting up openings, and one two punch, as opposed to a Blakeor Berdych forehand where they'll pound the heck out of the ball. With Nadals retriving ability he negates Federer's "openings" to hit winners.
     
    #10
  11. breakfast_of_champions

    breakfast_of_champions Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,068
    no, federer is a different mentality than bjorn. probably a stronger mentality. i remember bjorn getting behind against connors, early in his career, and just packing it in many times. it seemed to resurface aganst jmac later in his career. never seen that from fed, ever. bjorn also played a much more physically demanding game.
     
    #11
  12. skip1969

    skip1969 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,456
    Location:
    Pleasantville
    you're my new best friend.

    sometimes, i read s**t on here and i wonder . . . "what planet are these people living on?"

    ring . . . . ring . . .

    "um . . . you should get that. it's reality calling."
     
    #12
  13. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    You guys are so funny. When did I ever say Fed SHOULD retire? You guys are in such "defense mode" and so utterly blown away that you have now become delusional.
     
    #13
  14. TacoBellBorderBowl1946

    TacoBellBorderBowl1946 Professional

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,085
    nope, he will win slams for the next five years then he won't retire but will let the young guns take over.
     
    #14
  15. Ivanišević

    Ivanišević Rookie

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    343
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    well, you did write "history really has been reapiting itself"...
     
    #15
  16. BabolatFan

    BabolatFan Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    790
    Location:
    East Coast
    Is that what you'd like happened?
     
    #16
  17. simi

    simi Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Laurentia
    contents of this post voluntarily deleted in an effort to minimize trolling
     
    #17
  18. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    I think its your defensivenes and love for Fed that is pathetic. I asked a simple honest question and you guys freak out. Whats so offensive about my question? Its an intresting analogy...why not discuss it like gentlemen?
     
    #18
  19. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,136
    Pusher,

    How about you retire from these boards? Talk about a sore, snobbish, arrogant "victor". Here we have a ********* hoping one of the greatest players of all time will retire.

    Nadal can't even get past the relatively early around at non-French grand slams. But even if he does, Federer will beat him in the slam finals. Federer is just too good on the faster surfaces.

    People saying Borg was mentally weak? BS. Borg won that famous match against McEnroe where McEnroe beat him in an 34-point 4th set tie-breaker; Borg then won the match. Borg was mentally stronger than McEnroe -- period. Better player, greater player. End of discussion.

    How about you face reality: Federer's game is built to last a very very long time. Nadal's isn't. He relies on speed, which will wane as he gets older; and on grinding, which will make him more prone to injuries. He's already had an inordinate amount of injuries, even for a tennis player. Nadal will probably retire before Federer does (or if he doesn't, will fall out of the top 10 before Fed does).
     
    #19
  20. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    OMG! What have I done to deserve such outbursts? You guys really need to chill out. I am sorry that my predictions were correct; however I have simply asked a very rational question. Why can't we just behave like gentlemen?

    I like Fed. I do not want him to retire. However, I really do see an analogy between Fed & Borg. If Nadal should win the US Open then I think Nadal may crack psycologically.

    I do not think Nadal has even a remote chance at Wimbledon....but if he somehow did win that I really think Fed would absolutely hang it up. But since I believe that to be impossible I only brought up the US open. Now please stop mourning your loss and behave.
     
    #20
  21. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,136
    Pusher,

    Sorry, but your attempt to downplay your question like it's some honest question is bullcrap. In previous posts, you made some nasty comments about how Fed was going to retire because of Nadal. The tone is hardly "innocent".

    Analogies between Borg and Federer? No, sorry. The only analogy is their icy demeanor on court. Their games are very different. Borg's game is more like Nadal's game -- very physically demanding.

    I mean, what the heck, if anything, Federer's game is getting better. He's better this year than he was before on clay.

    PS: An ass who has been attempting to dominate all conversations he enters, and maniacly screaming that anyone who tries to analyze why Federer lost is "making excuses", has no business telling anyone to "behave".
     
    #21
  22. FiveO

    FiveO Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,260
    IMO the premise is flawed. It assumes and places entirely too much emphasis on one cause, a h2h match-up, as THE basis for retirement. Mc may have hastened Borg's retirement but there were other and aguably more direct dynamics involved.

    (quoted from HickokSports.com):
    Imagine being if not the best, a consistent member of the top 3 for nearly 8 straight years and given an ultimatum to play year round or be forced to qualify for tourneys won the year prior. Ever wonder why two of JMc's repeated mantra's are 1) his disappointment regarding Borg's retirement and 2) his constant harping on the relentlessness of a year round schedule?

    Also keep in mind that as young as Borg was when he retired, he had won at least one major for 8 straight years. How many champions have a longer uninterrupted run of majors?

    I believe Fed's game, as well balanced as it is, does not match up well vs. Nadal on dirt and that it is enough for Rafa to have gotten into Fed's head on clay. It's obvious that Fed is different vs. Rafa, part physical and by now at least somewhat psychologically. On its face Nadal's game may match up well at the Aussie too. Moya, Ferrero and other dedicated dirt ballers have had some success there, no matter how fleeting, but it remains for Nadal to prove it Down Under. Fed is more vulnerable to many more of the other 126 players in the Wimbledon draw than Rafa. On the other hand Nadal is vulnerable to many more in the field than Fed is on both grass and the hardcourts at the USO. Other hard court titles are nice, but 7 rounds on the hardcourt majors of NY or Melbourne with the other best hardcourters in the draw has and will continue to present more problems for Nadal than they will for Fed.

    I don't think we can pencil in Rafa as a sure thing for the Flushing final.

    Fed has never been considered the #1 clay-courter but he has proven himself the #2 in the biggest events including the one major played on dirt. Off clay Nadal is simply not the #2 on anything. Maybe that could change. But even if it should Raf's run on hardcourts would likely be as long as a Fed's run on clay should Roger ever grab a title at RG.

    So no. Not only because it is unlikely the h2h is THE cause for an athlete's retirement whether it was Borg, McEnroe, Becker or Sampras. Fed has been winning majors for "only" four years despite his number of titles. As the number 2 on his worst surface, Fed has a very realistic chance of winning at RG in the next few years and more so than what many view as his direct predecessor and major title record holder, Sampras, ever had. Lastly it is unlikely that Fed's demise at the USO will come at Nadal's hands.
     
    #22
  23. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,136
    FiveO,

    Good analysis. Nadal's strengths seem perfectly aligned with the few of Roger's weaknesses. It is a match-up issue. The problems with trying to determine anything by h2h are illustrated by the Blake-Federer-Nadal triangle, whereby we cannot say which player is better based on head-to-head rankings, because we have inconsistencies.

    In a rational ranking system, #1 > #2, and #2 > #3. Therefore, #1 > #3. However, going by h2h, we get ranking contradictions:

    1. Blake > Nadal
    2. Nadal > Federer
    3. Federer > Blake

    therefore:

    From 1 and 2: Blake > Federer. But 3 states Federer > Blake.

    From 1 and 3: Federer > Nadal, but 2 states Federer < Nadal. Etc.

    Only a moron would think that "the best player in the world" should be determined by h2h. You can't even set up a coherent system that way!

    Certainly, Roger will not retire as long as he can continue winning Grand Slams. I suspect that'll be longer than Nadal can continue winning Grand Slams.
     
    #23
  24. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,827
    He would be shamed right out of tennis, but do you really think that will ever happen:confused: Nadal continues to amaze everyone but that woudl be one serious feat that would put him as the most amazing tennis player ever
     
    #24
  25. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    This was my post...I think its time you looked in the mirror.

    I have been nothing but calm cool and collected. On the other hand you are frothing at the mouth. I simply and calmly put forward very rational predictions and issues and you get hysterical.
     
    #25
  26. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,791
    Location:
    Greece
    Federer only lost to Nadal because he had a fight with Mirka the previous night and he was very angry and not concetrated in the game!!!!That's why Mirka didn't go to the stadium..:mad:
    That's all..There's no point into further analysis and discussion!!:cool:


    :mrgreen:
     
    #26
  27. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    Five O,

    Bravo. A ver fine analysis indeed! Thank you! I do agree that Borg retired in part due to being forced to qualify. That was completely idiotic! How could the greatest player in the world be forced to qualify!!!!???? INSANE!; however.....thats only part of the reason:

    Borg himself has said that after being #1 for so long anything less is unbearable. I truly believe that the qualifying crap, burn out, and the domination by Mcenroe hastened Borgs early retirement at the age of 26.

    But I just thought of a better analogy: HINGIS!!!!! Both are from Switzerland as well!! I neve believe her about her "injury"...she retired because of the Williams sisters.
     
    #27
  28. mileslong

    mileslong Professional

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,396
    Location:
    newport beach, california
    best post ever...
     
    #28
  29. FEDEXP

    FEDEXP Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Just ignore the Pusher Man....
     
    #29
  30. 127mph

    127mph Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    777
    to say that rafa will win the us open is a joke, people keep saying he has mastered hardcourts, but this is only half true. the only legit hardcourt victory was when he won dubai. his montreal win was a joke and as well his china open victory.
     
    #30
  31. skip1969

    skip1969 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Messages:
    6,456
    Location:
    Pleasantville
    um . . . i think that's what is commonly known as "the height of irony". classic.

    plus, in referernce to the original thread, "If Nadal wins the US open will Federer retire the way Borg did?" . . . if this is your idea of a "very rational prediction" . . . then i shudder to think what your coo-coo predictions sound like.
     
    #31
  32. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,540
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    Ehmm... Why?
     
    #32
  33. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    I said IF he wins the US OPEN. sheesh! You guys are real becoming unraveled. ...I hope you get over your loss soon.
     
    #33
  34. 127mph

    127mph Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    777
    why? in montreal who lost in first round? o hewitt and roddick. o and who didnt play? federer and safin. now, who was the only guy who could challange nadal at the tournament? o a 35 year old named andre agassi in the finals. and the china open basically no one played in that tournament except clay courters. get my jist?
     
    #34
  35. Kid Carlos

    Kid Carlos Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    623
    Nadal will not be able to walk when he is 30, all players with his game style breakdown. I love how if Federer had won the French then the convo of Federer having no competition would have come about. Why not predict that Nadal will not even get to the final of either Wimby or the U.S. bc he will be drained and lose to lower ranked players like Blake anyways. Just like last year he will play summer clay tournaments and Toronto and Cincy and have nothing left.
     
    #35
  36. santolg321

    santolg321 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    I think that is not a reason to retire, I think that he would train way even harder and he would find a way to beat nadal.
     
    #36
  37. Count Grishnackh

    Count Grishnackh Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Messages:
    397
    Hey, don't sweat it. The Fed fans are still stinging from the final and you throw a little salt on their wounds. They're gonna yell. If Fed were beating Nadal they would laugh off your posts. But that isn't the case and your posts are touching a nerve, a serious nerve. But honestly, I'm enjoying it. Keep it up. =)
     
    #37
  38. 127mph

    127mph Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    777
    how dare you
     
    #38
  39. Morpheus

    Morpheus Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,136
    They are in a much different positions. Borg was more dominant and had much tougher competition.
     
    #39
  40. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927

    funny
     
    #40
  41. verker-er

    verker-er New User

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    73
    There's a lot of disinformation over Nadal's wins on Hardcourt. Here are the stats.

    At Montreal he beat the following

    - Moya (who supposedly owns him on hardcourts)
    - Grosjean (always tough on fast courts)
    - Matthieu (in case people think that its inevitable PHM beats him on a fast court)
    - Agassi (you can say he was 35 but then that also takes away from what fed did at the US Open)

    At Madrid

    - Robredo
    - Stepanek
    - Ginepri (coming of US Open Semis)
    - Ljubicic (I feel like world number 2)

    In sum I think one think which can't be underestimated is his mental strentgh no matter what surface. For someone who is supposedly not a good server he takes an awful lot of sets 7-5 or 7-6.

    As for where he'll improve, I think he'll eventually sort out hitting his groundies flatter and attacking more (although low bouncing grass may be tough). He'll probably work on his volley's as well. As has been pointed out he has great hands.

    I think his biggest weakness is the return of serve. A lot of that has to do with great hand eye co-ordination which you either have or don't. Agassi, Hewitt and Federer all have incredible reflexes whereas someone like Roddick clearly doesn't. I'm not sure about Nadal yet.
     
    #41
  42. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Oh yeah, Nadal only beat a 35 year old at Montreal. Yeah, a 35 year old that just won a tournament, easily beating guys like Gaudio and Chela and the Muller the Roddick killer, and got to the finals of the US Open, giving Federer more trouble than he ever wanted.
     
    #42
  43. brolycjw

    brolycjw New User

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    97
    Why not change the topic title to "If Nadal wins the US open, will pigs fly?"
     
    #43
  44. Gilgamesh

    Gilgamesh Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    423
    WTF would Fed retire?

    Borg didn't retire because McEnroe forced him to although it is believed he is one of the primary reasons. But the guy had a troubled personal life and he didn't want to compete in any competitions other than GS which made the tour officials scorn.

    Last I checked Fed had none of those issues.
     
    #44
  45. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    Actually Borg himself had said he did quit partly because of the competition. He said that after being #1 for so long....#2 was not something that he could settle for. The personal issues and being burnt out are of course also true. But what about Hingis? Why do you think she retired? Was it the injury or was it the Williams sisters?
     
    #45
  46. Gilgamesh

    Gilgamesh Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    423
    Yes partly but primarily I don't think so. Borg had personal demons had the tennis officials were against him because he wanted to skip the tour and only play in the GS. But your post suggests that McEnroe was the primary reason Borg quit. Hey I am the BIG McEnroe fan but I would never suggest that.

    As for Hingis...we can only speculate. I think her injury was the primary reason. She just couldn't play at the same level anymore and when you can't compete like you use to for a player who has been on top it's hard to swallow. But I would never suggest that the Williams sisters made her quit. That is an ignorant assumption. Partly the reason sure. Solely the reason...if that was true Hingis should quit because she isn't a competitor.

    I would be disgusted if you were suggesting the same thing about Borg...
     
    #46
  47. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    As far as Borg..there is no primary or secondary reasons....they all add up.

    As far as Hingis...then you also believe many sports commentators also are ignorant. In fact I believe that almost everyone on the tour and most experts believe that the real reason Hingis quit was beacuse of the Sisters. Everyone is polite about it....but everyone really know the real reason she quit. Her lawsuit went nowhere and she is miraculously back on the tour with no complaints. Come on!
     
    #47
  48. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,136
    Firstly, just because you start a thread doesn't mean that anyone who talks about any tangents should be babbled at for "making excuses" for Federer.

    Secondly, I was referring to your conduct elsewhere. In numerous threads where people have offered explanations for why Federer lost to Nadal at FO, or why he has a difficult time with Nadal, you respond by saying that they're just making excuses, and we should just say Nadal is a great clay-court player, and that's it, with nothing else.

    Anyone mentioning any of Nadal's flaws -- and getting knocked out early in all the other grand slams is a flaw -- is told that they're just "yes, but-ing" and you act like they're downplaying Nadal's greatness on clay.
     
    #48
  49. The Pusher Terminator

    The Pusher Terminator Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,927
    Fed got his butt kicked...get over it and stop crying like a little girl. I'm embarrased for you.
     
    #49
  50. bcaz

    bcaz Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    986
    Hmm ... people are dissing Federer the way they vilified Sampras while he was dominating the sport, only to worship him when he finally went away ... I guess if Roger doesn't win every match against every comer, single elimination format, up to 128 draw, best in the world, come out on top every week, regardless of every bounce, every call, every ache and pain, if he doesn't win every single match, nay, dominate in 2-3 sets, give up no breaks, he is dog****. You guys who buy into this **** have no concept of excellence. BTW, Nadal is pretty good, too.

    Phooey.
     
    #50

Share This Page