Which is more likely Fed winning RG or Nadal at Wimby?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by loki6836, Jun 23, 2006.

?

Which is more likely?

  1. Federer eventually winning Roland Garros

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Nadal eventually winning Wimbledon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Neither of these things will ever happen

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. loki6836

    loki6836 New User

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    23
    Which is more likely, i know this has probably been discussed but never seen a poll on it. I personally think nadal will burn out at a younger age due to playing style and therefore never take the time to develop his game for grass. And I do see eventually nadal getting unlucky and losing to somebody at RG which would allow fed to win cause IMO fed is second best clay-courter in the world and Nadal is maybe in the top 10 grass courters so even if the reverse happens and fed loses to someone at wimby nadal will still be beat by Ancic, Roddick, Hewitt, etc. so i personally think fed winning RG is more likely.
     
    #1
  2. KBalla08

    KBalla08 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    593
    well neither of them could happen, but if they were to happen, fed would win RG first
     
    #2
  3. dmastous

    dmastous Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,132
    Pretty simple choice. Federer has already show success on clay. He's been the 2nd best clay court player this year.
    Nadal's game is not suited for grass, and he hasn't played well on it.
     
    #3
  4. TacoBellBorderBowl1946

    TacoBellBorderBowl1946 Professional

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,085
    Nadal hasn't reached the 3rd round of Wimbledon yet, while Federer has reached the semis and finals of RG two straight years in a row. Nadals game doesn't suit grass while Fed's suits all surfaces. Its far more likely Fed will win RG than Nadal even making the finals at Wimbledon.
     
    #4
  5. Robbie_1988

    Robbie_1988 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Really simple this.

    Despite not having won Roland Garros yet, Roger has managed to get to the final. And in 2005 he lost in the semi final but to eventual champion Nadal.

    And Nadal? He hasn't even got to the final of wimbie yet.
     
    #5
  6. RiosTheGenius

    RiosTheGenius Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,818
    I think Roger Federer has better chances, but you never know in tennis.... I mean, no one thought Agassi would ever win either one of them, and he's got both trophies at home.
     
    #6
  7. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    Sorry, no offense, but for the time being that question is nonsense...
     
    #7
  8. loki6836

    loki6836 New User

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    23
    No offense taken and i completely agree that the answer should be obvious. but i was looking back on a thread where 11 voted that nadal would be this years wimby champ and i decided to see how many people would just blindly follow there i love nadal emotions instead of looking at the statistics.
     
    #8
  9. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,540
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    That's true, but a little correction: Nadal DID make it to the 3rd round once :)
     
    #9
  10. malakas

    malakas Banned

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,791
    Location:
    Greece
    Nadal himself said in an interview that "Roger has more chances of winning RG than me W."
     
    #10

Share This Page