Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by makhan10, May 12, 2009.
in all but one match(except 2006 French Open Final), the winner of first set won the match.
So what's your point?
His point is win the first set
What a revelation.
What did you expect?
there's only been one gs final that went 3 sets
Just because it happened in the past doesn't mean winner of first set is guaranteed the match.
Would've been 2 if Nadal didnt bust his knee at the Wimbledon 07 final.
Here is another statistic:
The Little Known Secret That Rafael Nadal Used to Win The 2009 Australian Open
You’ve heard the news: Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in an epic five-set battle to win the 2009 Australian Open. It was the longest match in the tournament’s history, lasting over 4 hours. And it was Nadal’s first victory on a hard court surface.
But what you did NOT know, is this: Nadal “baited” Federer into the five-set battle. He knew he stood a better chance of winning.
Nadal’s Secret Tactic — Know Your Competitors Inside Out
Nadal knew one thing that we did not know.
Going into this tournament final, Nadal knew that Federer had a terrible track record when it came down to stretching the match to five-sets. Federer had only won 13 out of 24 previous five-set matches, and lost 11. Nadal on the other hand, had won 11 out of 14 five-set matches — a staggering 78% winning record!
That stat alone made all the difference.
If you look back at how Nadal played his fourth set you will notice how he “gave in” after realizing that the set was a lost cause. He had already lost break points, and he knew it would be better to conserve energy to take Federer into the fifth set. And that’s what he did. He knew he stood a better chance of beating Federer in the fifth set. When it came down to the fifth set, he went all out for his break point, and he got it. He forced Federer to make more errors, and cruised to the end.
Separate names with a comma.