Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by sureshs, Jun 9, 2006.
The Bryan brothers or Bjorkman-Mirnyi?
I seem to just go against whatever you say lol
That is obvious.
Theoretically Nadal would win but there's dangerous force with
the swiss magician that Nadal should be careful with.
Federer might be able to do something creative and manage to
squeak out a win much like the way Sampras somehow managed
to beat Courier and Bruguera at French Open...
Rafael Nadal !
If this were a Wimbledon final Federer would 6-1, 6-2, 6-0 but a French Open final Nadal is a lock to win.
Fed blew the first set against Bandy today. Nadal dismantled Lube in straight sets. Things look impossible for Fed right now.
Lube sucks on clay though. His movement is awful, and his groundstrokes arent as forecful as other surfaces where he gets a clean bounce. Nalbandian is much better then Lube on clay.
If Federer had played Ljubicic today... he would've beat him just as bad. Nadal looked ordinary in the first set; ljubicic was horrible in the second set, and Nadal and ljubicic both played decent in the third set.
The commentators kept talking about how good Nadal was playing... but really, I didn't think that he was doing that good.
nadal in 5 tough sets. federer will somehow find a way to win a couple of sets like he always does
Nadal in 4.
I don't think Federer can win against Nadal from baseline
on clay (or even hard court).
He hired Tony Roche and practiced net game. The time
finally came and he will need to use it ! The bad news is
it's on mud.
slow hard court you mean. fast hard court, carpet, and grass, Nadal would be the one who need to come to net all the time to have a chance but Nadal is too weak on those surfaces to play Federer anyway so it does not matter.
That is why their rivalry is bad. Fed is good enough to play Nadal all the time on Nadal's surfaces, slow-medium hard court and clay, but has no chance to win; Nadal is not strong enough to play Federer on his surfaces-fast hard court, carpet, and grass, to lose and even their head to head.
Which one's fast court and which one's slow? I know US Open
has fast courts. But in general, they all got slower.
I think Nadal will improve on grass. On carpet, Federer is alo to be blamed:
he skips most portion of carpet seasons.
Nothing wrong with this rivarly except it's baseliner vs baseliner.
No classic match up of serve and voller against baseliner.
In fact, the famous rivarly of Borg vs McEnroe was mostly
on Wimbledon anyway. I don't think McEnroe was strong on clay.
And I don't think Borg was strong on hard courts.
They were both top players on grass. Their match-up's at WImbledon
is a classic.
Federer in 5
Fast hard courts are Cincinnati, U.S Open, and Pacific Life. On those Nadal would not be able to beat Federer from the baseline and would to come to net just like Federer has to against Nadal on slow hard courts, and since Federer hasnt been able to win a match doing that yet, Nadal certainly wouldnt be able to, being far less comfortable and effective at the net then Federer, even though Nadal passes a bit better. The slow hard courts are Australia, Nasdaq, and the Canadian Open. Not sure on Madrid.
I agree to some extent, but he will never even win a set off Federer on grass playing with him from the baseline. Roger moves better on the grass, his backhand slice would be a problem with the low bounce, and his forehand would overpower Nadal on the grass. Nadal certainly cant volley or serve well enough to win on grass that way so he will always be out of luck against roger on grass.
Well there are barely any carpet events anyway. Still Roger usually gets injured during the fall season. That will change at some point.
Wrong, but what is also wrong with it is Nadal and Federer play only on Nadal surfaces and Federer isnt winning any of the matches so their head to head is too lopsided to be a rivalry, yet Nadal is not strong enough on Federer surfaces to play him and lose on those to even the head to head.
So you either have Federer winning a bunch of events where Nadal is gone before the quarters, or Nadal winning a bunch of events over Federer at the end every time. So it is a bad rivarly for that, plus what you said as well perhaps.
If that is what you like then I guess you dont see that today. Henman is the best serve-volleyer but he isnt really a threat to win slams anymore.
Same thing with Roger and Nadal though, their rivalry is only on hard courts. Nadal is no good on grass, and Roger is not that good on clay.
tHE BRYAN brothers will win
I like them alot, I like seeing them win. I wish they showed them more on TV. Whenever there is a Bryans match and a Nadal match going on together they should ignore the Nadal match and show the Byrans match.
Fed has enough talent to pull off a win. He simply needs to not let Nadal distract him from using it.
Bryan Bros and Nadal!
Separate names with a comma.