Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Tropikal_Knights, Jan 23, 2013.
Can the trolling please stop?
one of the best returnlers of all time, not one of the very best of all time, clueless .... learn to read ...
he wasn't. If you'd seen the USO 2001, you would know better ....
Google up , check the short list of best returners ever, you will see hewitt's name in almost, if not every list ....
better returners than rafa that federer has faced :
agassi, hewitt, murray, djoker, nalbandian, davydenko, ferrer
Of course you would, Rafa wouldn't stand a chance, I think Fed at his peak would beat peak Rafa and Novak AT THE SAME TIME.
Novak won Rome and he played very well in Madrid, better than Delpo in RG. Delpo hasn't won any significant clay titles. Delpo wasn't better back then just like he isn't better now.
LOL more excuses and crap, tell me which power server has knocked Rafa out of majors since he won his first HC major. Rosol is the only one lol and he played a perfect 5th set to do it.
Doha 2011 Nadal was coughing on court. In late 09 he was in terrible form and in Doha 2010 Nadal choked because he got nervous since he hadn't won a title in 10 months at the time. That's 4 of those losses. Would've been a much dfferent story in majors.
Yeah I do because Rafa is a champion and guys like Nalby and Davydenko would not have much success against him in majors.
umm, no .... Fed would be in big trouble vs Rafa at AO ..... any version of rafa ..
Best returner of all time applies to what I said, if he can return so well and has so many more better attributes than Nadal to his game WHY was he consistently losing in the EARLY ROUNSs at majors???
I don't need to google anything I know Pete has never liked Andre and he'd take a few shots at him.
Murray, Agassi, Djoker and Nalby I agree with, but Rafa has broken Fed FAR more times than Hewitt and Ferrer have.
Nole won Rome in 2008 - beating wawrinka ... we're not talking about achievements here ..talking about level of play
you missed soderling RG 2009 and delpo USO 2009 ... was in trouble vs haase/petzschener in wim 10
how many of them did he beat convincingly outside of clay ? soderling wim 10, berdych AO 2012, delpo wim 11 ?
roddick out of top 20 playing cr*p doesn't really count ...
yeah, you'd actually have a point if nalby/davydenko were not playing well vs fed at those majors ... fact is they were ... if they could give fed tough matches , they sure as hell would be much tougher for rafa, given they matchup much better vs rafa ...
prime rafa, yes, of course he'd have it tough ...
since when did I say he has many attributes better than rafa ? I only said his returning was clearly better ...BH, movement,passing are on a similar level ...
rafa's FH and serve are clearly better and that is what makes a huge difference ....
I said "Google up , check the short list of best returners ever, you will see hewitt's name in almost, if not every list .... "
I didn't ask to google for sampras opinion ... I already gave that quote ...
clay,we know rafa will break players more there than anyone except maybe borg ... that has to do with overall game rather than just the return
If we take just the HC and grass matches, the gap in return games won narrows down considerably ... and quite a bit of it has to do with nadal being the better player off the ground and being a worse matchup for fed than either hewitt/ferrer ....
I know when he won Rome, did you read the full sentence? Nothing changes.
LOL Del Potro is not a power server, he is a power ground stroke type of player. Sure Delpo can hit powerful serves but nothing anywhere near what he should be able to at his height. Same with Sod, it wasn't his serving that got him over the line against Rafa at RG it was because he was hitting his strokes hard and dictating play with them.
You also forgot Berdych WIM2010.
The funniest part is these guys that Rafa lost to, Fed lost to them as well even though it's widely regarded Fed can handle the big servers very well. He lost to Sod at RG, he lost to Berdych at WIM and USO, he lost to Del po at USO, he lost to Tsonga at WIM. lol. They're not just big servers they have a power ground game as well to back it up.
When I think of rocket servers I think of Roddick, Karlovic, Isner, Raonic etc. Guys that rely primarily on their serve.
Nalbandian 5-1 h2h at the time he faced Fed, so he obviously matched up well vs Fed too and still lost.
Did you not read the part that said ANY version of Rafa? It's true too because 17 year old Rafa whipped him in straights without even facing any BP IIRC.
No you also said he has better volley's, better lob (which I definitely agree with), his defense is similar, well Rafa's defense is incredible so since Hewitt is any where near that level why was he losing to qualifiers. Even in AO03 he struggled against a qualifier lol.
I took your advice and found this:
HOw embarrasing for you that Nadal's return stats are VERY close to Agassi's even on HC.
No, I just proved it. Rafa is very accomplished returner on HC and on clay is the goat.
yeah, most of those losses happened after federer's peak from 2004-07 and even his prime (till AO 2010 )
yeah, and roddick playing well has a more than decent ground game ... ditto for scud ...
completely different from raonic, karlovic,isner ...
yeah, not saying he was easy for fed, but just that he matches up quite a bit better vs rafa ..
a sick federer ....
federer would've beaten rafa @ AO 2005, AO 2006, AO 2007 had those matches happened ...
Lol those guys weren't around or playing at that level from 04-07 so we can never really know, all I know is they aren't primarily reliant on their serve.
Yeah and Rafa playing well has a pretty good game too...
BUt we are not discussing their entire games, we are talking rocket servers and these guys are the ones who crank it up at very high speeds consistently. Scud's ground game would fall to pieces against Rafa. Just like you said with his USO encounter, even though he was winning the majority of his first serve points he still lost. This is 06 Rafa at USO we're talking about here so it's not like Rafa was in top form either.
Does he? Well Nalby won the first 5 of 6 matches against Fed, against Rafa he won the first 2 and then lost every time since.
Really? So why did Fed struggle against Rafa in Miami 05? Why did he lose in Dubai in 06? Rafa was pretty good on HC back then, just not consistent, the only one I'd say he'd most likely win would be 2005, but 2006 and 2007 really depends on Rafa's level of play.
Sick Fed also beat Davydenko before facing Nadal so he wasn't that bad to make an excuse, it's not like he was coughing on court like Rafa was in Doha 2011. Going from beating Davydenko to not even earning a single BP against a 17 year old kid isn't because of sickness.
This thread is now officially useless for it's intended purpose.
yeah, only since 2009, in majors
federer beat soderling thrice losing once
beat tsonga thrice, losing once
he beat delpo 4 times, losing once
only exception being berdych who he is 1-2 against in majors since then ...before 2009, federer had won like 19 sets to berdych's 3 in 8 matches ....including 3 straight-set wins in majors ... berdych was in the top 20 in those matches @ the majors and for majority of the matches ...
soderling RG 2010 among them is the only performance which was really good enough to beat peak fed ...
the rest, I'd favour peak fed .... all of them had holes which peak fed would exploit ....
I was talking about comparision of roddick/scud vs isner/karlovic/raonic ... roddick/scud have much better return/ground game ...
scud was ranked #128 @ 2006 USO for heaven's sake ... yet rafa won only 3 points on his first serve out of 48 ? LOL !
3 of those 5 matches were before fed won his first slam ...those matches were mostly competitive ; nadal was completely dismantled in the 2 indoor matches vs nalby ... had to save MPs vs nalby in IW 2009 ( this was nalby quite a bit worse than from 2003-2007 ) ...
2006 would be the the closest , given federer was on/off there ... 2007, federer was at his best, rafa gets a set at max, that's about it ...
federer is much worse @ miami than at the AO ......complete shankfest vs nadal @ miami 2011, nole 2009 ( who just managed to be a bit better ), lost twice to roddick there ...
dubai was a choke in a BO3, federer was a bit on/off at that time ....but best of 5, he has more room/time to recover .... plus he'd have raised his level even more for a slam if/when required than in a dubai match ...
do you really follow anything much in tennis apart from your beloved rafa ?
davydenko was ranked in the 40s or 50s at that time ... he only hit his stride from 2005 onwards ... and federer struggled mightily vs him , it was 7-5 in the 3rd and fed barely won more points than davydenko ...
Tsonga at WIM would've beaten peak Fed as well. He went into unstoppable mode.
You're a Fed fan and you're bagging Rafa. LOL ! Need you be reminded that Rafa OWNS Fed? Like he owns him, Federer is Nadal's property at the majors.
And how many slams did Nalby have? You always try and come up with some bs excuse for Fed. Fed winning his first slam had nothing to do with it, Nalby beat Fed at 03 USO.
Yeah just like he gets a set at max at WIM07, oh wait...
So why couldn't he raise his level to beat Nadal in majors since 2007? You can't come up with this post prime crap because Fed has beaten Novak and Murray and Delpo and EVERYONE else but he can not beat Nadal.
What was Rafa's ranking?
Murray has the advantage on this surface particularly given his draw. Let's see what happens.
tsonga was playing well from set 2 onwards ... fed took set 2 and federer returned much better at his peak and would've taken one of the last 3 sets ....
not outside of clay ...try again .......you fail ...
fed winning his first slam had nothing to do with it ????? LOL , bwahaha ........
yeah and that USO 2003 4R match was a competitive match ... unlike the two blowouts indoors nalby had vs rafa ...and though not at his 2003-07 level, he had rafa on a string in IW 2009 ..
go and watch those matches to actually gain a clue on the difference in matchup ....
LOL, wut ? rafa at wim 07 final played much better than in any HC match at a slam till then ....rafa hadn't even reached the semi of a HC slam until then .. he had already made the finals of wimby in 2006 ....
yeah, he got 3 chances at majors outside of clay, wimby final was close ; AO final, played well, but was without a good serve, which could've possibly been the difference ; AO 2012 , already 30+ and it isn't easy to grind it out ... not saying impossible, but not that easy .... and again those losses on clay couldn't have helped mentally .....(half their matches have been on it when clay is only ~30% of the tour and half their slam matches have been @ RG, which is only one of the 4 slams )
somewhere in the 40s or 50s IIRC ...
Ummm since when did this thread turn out to be Nadal vS Fed and whose C... is the biggest?
Why do all threads which happen to have one of the above as their subject degenerate into who is better?
Give it a break!
You will never agree.
I have my own opinions on the subject but know they will lead to more trolling so I refuse to go down that route.
Now back to the threads subject.........It seems most here think Murray will beat Roger in 4. "Say it ain't so Joe"
Well for me Fed will have to bring his A game and sustain it for the entirety of the match. Kill the short FH's cut down the shanks and serve like a demon. Im guessin he should be rocking 80% min.
It is a miracle at his age he is giving opponents the quality of Novack and Murray a run for their money. In tennis one year diff is a big deal. What to say of 6 or 7 yrs. The guy is a modern marvel. Silky Smooth. Velvet. IF he can roll back the years and get past Ole Grumpy it will count as one of the best.
To even get this far at his age is like winning. Of course nothing beats actually making the final ending with the trophy. But at this stage of the Great ones career we take what we can get.
Ma brain says Murray in 3 heart going Fedarali in 4.
Fast hard courts are Murray's best surface.
He's bageled Nadal and given Federer 6-2, 6-3 on these surfaces amongst a lot of other great results.
Sure he can play on slow but not his favoured.
This is Dokovic's best surface not Murray's
Don't see Muzzer losing this one. He's riding too high now.
Worst case scenario
<--- loses in four!
Both Hewitt and Courier agreed that Tsonga caught fire from the third set onwards. He played well in set 2, but he raised his level after that set and Fed had no answer.
UNDEFEATED at AO LOL. And Clay can NEVER be disregarded. Ever. It is a recognised ATP surface and therefore you cannot act like it doesn't matter.
It does not matter how close matches were or not. FACT Nalbandian DEFEATED Federer at 03 USO which occurred AFTER Fed won his first slam. Therefore it had absolutely NOTHING to do with their AO04 encounter.
Yes, but before that 07 final nobody would've picked Rafa to take 2 sets from Fed. People were actually suspecting that Fed was getting closer to solving his Nadal problems on clay after having beaten Nadal at Hamburg and had his closest RG match against him at the time. People were believing that Fed was no longer as worried against Nadal... how wrong they were
So 30+ Roger had no problem grinding it out against Novak at RG2011 or going for 4 and a half hours against Del Potro at the Olympics, but against Rafa he had a problem grinding it out? LMAO. Fed was very fresh having breezed through his matches all the way to the semi even had a walk over, while Rafa had a tough battle against Berdych in the qtrs. Fed's problem was Rafa was just too good for him, Fed didn't lose his serve in the second set because he couldn't grind it out Rafa it an amazing return at Fed's feet and 2 INCREDIBLE passing shots, one off the FH side from the players entrance lol, and the other a BH DTL. Nothing Fed could do, he was completely powerless.
As for the serve at AO, guess what, bad luck! If Fed didn't serve well that is his fault but it wouldn't have made a difference anyway, he served very well at WIM08. He also served pretty poorly vs Hewitt at 04 USO and still crushed him. Nadal didn't serve that well either, only 64% first serves in and only won 66% of them to go along with 4 DFs. Compared to WImbledon Rafa had 73% first serves in and won 69% of them as well as having only 3 DFs. Nadal wasn't at his best in that final either 50W and 41UE is quite high for him, in fact that's the highest UE count Rafa has ever had against Fed at a major.
So similar to Davydenko then right He couldn't even manage ONE single solitary BP against a kid ranked 40 or 50 on his worst surface. Fed was lucky Hewitt took Nadal out at 04 AO lol.
Are you daft? Djokovic and Nadal are two entirely different players with entirely different styles, making very different match-ups with Federer. And GRINDING IS a problem for Roger now. Isolated matches don't change that fact. Federer played his best FO in years in 2011 and at the Olympics, he was just coming off a victory at W plus the fact that he IS physically in a better shape than Del Po. Not to mention, it was grass. Del Po, as well as he played was still at a disadvantage on the surface. Even at the FO Federer didn't beat Djokovic as much by grinding (there were very few Nadal-Djokovic type retriever rallies) as by making excellent use of the sheer variety his game offers, forcing Djokovic into uncomfortable positions. He wasnt camping several feet behind the baseline and simply reacting out there. He was standing right on the baseline to receive throughout. He was consistently slicing to the Djokovic BH, forcing him to move in at his will. Players hate that. Especially today, because you no longer have great net players on tour.
And for all the talk of Nadal's "incredible passing shots," the fact remains that they were on a seriously high-bouncing surface giving Nadal more time. Watch him play indoors and he sure as hell doesn't make even half the so-called "incredible passing" shots he would normally make.
Federer has a chance, but I'm leaning towards Murray.
This, in no way whatsoever, helps your argument. First of all we are talking about the Australian Open which is played on plexicushion, not indoors. Those passing shots were absolutely unbelievable. THe problem is you don't play tennis and neither does abmk, whereas I do, on plexicushion too for that matter you have no idea how hard those shots are.
His argument was Nadal out grinded Fed which is false. Rafa broke Fed by hitting amazing shots that Fed couldn't do anything about. Fed was fresh going into the match whereas Nadal had a tough battle against Berdych.
Here's how the 3rd set TB went for Nadal's points:
1 - Fed missed an easy volley
2 - Nadal dictated play with a powerful CC BH, followed by a decent drop shot which Fed still managed to get to despite being taken out of court by the CC BH and then Rafa puts away an easy volley
3 - Fed misses a BH DTL
4 - Fed shanks a CC BH
5 - Nadal hits a good CC BH passing shot
6 - Fed nets a FH UTL
Then, being 6-1 down, 30+ year old Fed finds the mental strength and physical energy to bring it back to 6-5
7 - Nadal dictates play off his serve, Fed net a FH squash shot.
EXPLAIN how this is being out grinded.
I've already explained how Nadal completely outplayed Fed to break him in the second set.
Dear God. I'm getting a head-ache just reading The Order's posts.
It will be nervewracking, but I pick Federer, here's why;
1. Federer is the superior player
2. Federer has more experience
3. Federer leads in GS's
4. Murray didn't beat Fed at the Olympics, extreme fatigue did
5. I am a die hard Fed fan
6. Fed is playing some of his best tennis
That being said, clearly Murray CAN beat Fed, but I don't think it will happen, I just hope Fed isn't wiped out from the Tsonga match.
Just the fact that Federer might get past Murray is good enough for me. Seeing him produce high-level precision tennis even with the age gap of the other three top guys is always awesome. The guy has already logged like 10 years on a tennis court lol.
The Tsonga match was 2 days ago. That's 2 nights of sleep for Federer. More than enough time to recover. And the match was a relatively quick one for 5 sets. Not a long grinding affair.
Am I the only person who thinks that the 4 hours and 26 minute semi-final against Del Potro went some way towards explaining Federer's performance in the final? He's in his 30's for crissakes.
That match was tight, JMDP could have won it for how thinly sliced the final difference between them was. I too had the observation that the winner of this would be (playing for gold) at a recovery deficit compared to Murray. It was pretty obvious.
You are not the only one. Honest people will tell you that Fed played as a tired man did, double faults, mishits, it's one thing to lose, another to make errors Fed doesn't make.
Yeah, no **** Sherlock. Everybody knows AO is plexiscushion and a high-bouncing surface to boot. You are NEVER going to have grinders winning 6 hour matches otherwise. As for you playing on plexicushion- video please. And honestly, the very fact that you (assuming you actually play tennis) tried comparing amateur -level recreational tennis to professional tennis shows you infact are more likely to be making up fables as is your forte. Of course those passing shots are hard. So is every shot not just a top player but a top 100 player attempts. It takes effort of a lifetime to get there. Your point being?
Wow, that's your match-analysis Not very bright for someone who claims to play the game. "Rafa broke Fed by playing amazing shots" lol. Sounds like the sort of stuff his fawning fangirls would say.
uuuuuuuh? That was a 4-set match with Berdych choking as usual. Please, stop talking already.
Yes, and? How does that disprove the fact that Federer was out-grinded? (which he usually is against counterpunchers like Nadal?)
Pretty much went as predicted
Was a great match all round.
Now that it's over I'm gonna have to go with no.
well quite an interesting match.
One poster above states went as expected.
Expected was that federer was going to get knocked out in 3 or 4.
My views are abit different which I am going to post in a new thread. As the answer to this thread has been given.
Oh yeah I'm going to record my matches now LOL.
I've never compared the level of tennis we play to pros, only saying I have a FAR better idea than you do about how difficult those shots were given the fact that I play on plexicushion and you probably sit on your sofa growing piles.
Never said it was a match analysis. It is however 100% correct. You have NFI how hard those shots were. I already explained that Rafa hit a good return at Fed's feet when he tried to S&V then hit the incredible CC FH passing shot from the player's entrance and the BH DTL. You're so full of crap.
Federer couldn't do a damn thing about it, Rafa just out played him and you can't hack it.
Then I also gave an in-depth analysis of every point Rafa won in the TB. Fed had 3 UE, the rest were all won from Nadal's level of play. That isn't out grinding, out grinding is having long rallies until someone makes an error. Given the CC BH shank was very early on in the point, there are only 2 points in that TB where you could consider Rafa out grinded Fed, the rest not a chance.
Funny how Berdych doesn't choke against Federer :lol:
That match wasn't easy for Rafa he lost a set to Berdych for the first time in years and nearly lost another as well. MUCH harder than Fed's qtr final at least Rafa's opponent showed up.
Already explained. You've got absolutely NOTHING to go with now so keep back pedalling lol.
Away with you with this nonsense.
Can I now say Federer didn't beat Murray at USO 2008, extreme fatigue did?
If Federer was jaded it was because Murray was good enough to straight set Djokovic in the semi final and earned being fitter and fresher for the final. Federer did not by dragging out his semi with Del Potro.
Same goes for Djokovic in the AO final this Sunday.
He's played so well he's hammered nearly all opponents especially when it really mattered in the semi final.
Today Murray should have put Federer away in straight sets but he blew it and had to play an extra unnecessary draining 2 tie break sets so now he must suffer the consequences of being more tired on Sunday probably resulting in him losing the final.
That's Murray's fault.
At the Olympics you're trying to minimise Murray's gold because Federer didn't play well enough to finish off Del Potro in the semi and Murray did to put away Djokovic in straights.
Would you rather Federer had Djokovic instead?
Murray did and played unbelievable tennis to get the job done quickly and efficiently and conserve energy. Earned it.
Might as well, if you're going to claim you "play tennis on plexiscushion"
Of course you did. The way professional tennis is played and the way the ball reacts to their shots is not even remotely comparable to to an amateur (assuming you're even that level). No way is an amateur in any position to judge a Court. And RLA at that (considering RLA is often regarded as being slower than the outer courts). I'll take Martina Navratilova's opinion on this when she clearly said last year that Court was slow as clay (minus the slide).
LMAO. Like I said, any shot a top 100 player attempts across any surface is hard. Please quit making a fool out of yourself.
LOL what's that? Methinks you should find a better coach. Clearly you've learned nothing.
No, you didn't say it. You just gave it. In that fangirly fashion.
Awwww, cry me a river. I already said pro shots are hard. How does that change the fact that Nadal is like a deer in headlights on low-bouncing surfaces?
LMAO, this keeps getting better. This sort of nonsense if something Nadal fangirls would throw out. Not a technical analysis of the match.
Nope. Sorry. Anyone with two eyes knows defense is Nadal's trump card and that he thrives on out-grinding Roger.
No, what you gave is an account of how the points played out. Why the wrrors were caused, what was the Court positioning, where and how was a winner hit, THAT is an analysis. What you gave was a Chris Fowler version of the event neither proving nor disproving anything.
Again, two different match-ups but Berdych has choked against Roger. Anyway, Berdych is only giving Roger trouble NOW. Roger still owns him overall.
you know what they say about glass houses
yeah, past his prime fed , whose returning/movement has declined considerably ... peak fed would've easily taken one of those 3 sets, no question
I'm not disregarding clay. we know rafa is superior there , no question ... but its a fact that the h2h is skewed by the greater % of matches there ...
dumbo, how close the matches does matter - we were talking about matchups .. if player B has close matches vs player A and player C gets blown off court by player A, its more likely that player A is a worse matchup for player C rather than player B ... again, you just demonstrate that apart from your boy rafa, you haven't watched much ...
again, rafa had already proved quite a bit more on grass than on HC by then ...
the FO 2011 SF was one of the very few matches where he played close to his very best ... doesn't mean its going to happen every time ... clueless ..
the delpo match was a serve fest for a major part , it wasn't a grind fest >> again, you are just clueless
he didn't serve poorly vs hewitt @ 2004 USO, you fool ... first serve %s aren't the only indicator of how well the player is serving .. he served well there and put in clutch serves as and when required .
lol, you hyprocrite ........ saying serve wouldn't have made a difference while saying rafa's serve would have made quite a difference in the delpo match in USO 2009 SF - when federer's serve , when clicking is quite a bit better ...
yeah, he served well in wimbledon 2008, but his return wasn't clicking and ground game not as good as in the AO 2009 F ; expecting him to serve as well as he did in the wimbledon 2008 F would a bit too much, but atleast expected him to serve decently ...
regarding AO 2009, of course that's the highest count rafa has had vs fed in a major ... it was their longest match @ RG/AO ... and rafa served well vs fed @ AO 2009, not quite as well as wim 08, still served quite well ..
yes, clueless, because he was sick , he struggled vs davydenko and lost to nadal......... even in 2012, 30+ year old fed blasted nadal off court @ IW 2012 ...... again, you are just clueless ...
you are just a hypocrite who doesn't accept facts like federer being sick in miami 2004 when it was all over the news before the tourney even started , yet make dumb/non-sensical excuses like rafa was injured in IW 2012, when in fact , he went on to play the doubles final immediately after the fed semi-final and then went on to play singles AND doubles in miami next week ...
Not in the 2013 Australian Open!................ NO!
Nope. Not happening. Whether you believe me or not doesn't matter to me one bit. I couldn't give a rat's tossbag.
That's right pro's do hit with far more weight and accuracy than we do, which just makes Nadal's efforts even more impressive. Sorry he makes the greatest of all time look like a lapdog at the majors.
What does my coach have to do with you growing piles on your arse?
Ok so saying shots were incredible and amazing is fangirly hahahahaha time you see a doctor. The commentators always throw out those type of words when they see shots like that I guess Hewitt, COurier and McEnroe are also fangirls, but not you, no, you just carry on like an old bag.
Grass is a low bouncing surface, and Rafa dethroned Federer at the absolute height of his powers at Wimbledon whilst ******** can never even take 2 sets off Rafa at RG even when Rafa was still going through puberty he thumped Fed in 4 sets LOL.
out-grinding isn't a technical analysis either, it's just that of a butthurt *******.
LOL take out the aces and Rafa hit 32 winners to Fed's 35. Yep CLEAR out-grinding there.
LOL a shanked BH is a shanked BH you don't explain why it happened it's obvious Fed couldn't time it properly. As for the missed easy volley Fed was in perfect position and dunked it into the net really what is there to explain? I'm sorry you lack common sense. The other error was Fed's FH UTL, it hit the top part of the net and stayed on Fed's side, he went for a winner and missed it lol again common sense. Same with the missed BH DTL. The rest Nadal won the points. I explained CLEARLY that he hit a powerful CC BH which threw Fed out of position, followed it with a decent drop shot that Fed got to and then Nadal put away an easy volley. THen I also clearly explained that Rafa hit a CC BH passing shot there's not really much to explain to anyone with a brain cell it's obvious Fed approached Nadal BH side and got passed. THe last point Rafa serves out wide, Fed returns it then Rafa smacks a FH into the open side and Fed struggles to track it down and therefore tries a squash FH shot that hits the net.
You're just so blind and obviously lacking intelligence to understand that LOL.
But you said as usual. If Berdych usually chokes why didn't he choke against Fed in TWO slam matches where he beat him off the court? Again you can't answer so you back pedal LMAO.
Are you seriously that inept at figuring things out? Obviously Fed was fresh going into the match so to say he couldn't last with Nadal because of his age is ridiculous.
Don't get excited old woman.
Yeah so much so that the very next year when he was even older was able to win WImbledon, the slam where movement and returning is most important.
Yes you are, you say Hewitt's a FAR better returner than Rafa, but as I already proved with the link I included in one of my previous posts, Rafa's return numbers are comparable to Agassi's even on HC. If Hewitt is a far better returner than ALL surfaces need to be taken into account not just the ones that suit your biased opinion.
Oh and BTW FEd's slam count vs Nadal is skewed since there are 2 HC slams and only one clay. YOu can bet your house that if say AO or USO was on clay Rafa would have FAR more majors than Fed.
No, those matches were indoor HC and carpet, clearly Rafa's worst surfaces and have no bearing on any potential AO encounter. Fed always belts Nadal on indoor HC yet Rafa is undefeated against him at AO.
Doesn't matter, Fed had proved quite a lot more on grass than AO at the time also so it evens out. Rafa was expected to lose in 4 sets.
Fed did some pretty good grinding in his last couple AO matches....
Fed got outplayed face it, your hero was completely powerless.
No, but first serve % is probably THE most important indicator to how well a player is serving. Fed's serve didn't need to be any good in that USO final anyway with that pushover on the other side of the net.
But it was FAR more than what Rafa did at WIM and any RG match except for maybe 2005. LOL.
Rafa was definitely not at his best either especially after having that 5 hour semi and a day less rest.
And he served ok in that AO final but I wouldn't call it quite well, he served quite a bit better in their 2012 AO encounter. In 09 he served just as many DFs as aces.
Nadal made a commitement to his partner that he was going to play those tournaments so he wasn't just going to ditch his partner.
He even admitted that pushed on it when he shouldn't have. It definitely wasn't the smartest move he played the clay season with injections to numb the pain and those marks were even visible at WIM. Most likely the problem stemmed from his brutal AO encounter with Novak.
And sick or not Fed got belted by a 17 year old kid and couldn't even manage to get one BP. He wasn't that sick where he couldn't play, he just didn't know what to expect from Rafa and got belted accordingly.
Guys. Please shake hands and stop.
We don't have time to read and absorb epic sized slanging matches.
yeah, so ? sampras didn't win USO in 97,98,2000,2001, but won it in 2002 ...
becker won AO 96, having been eliminated early several times before , at his prime ...
players can come up with good performances even past their prime, just they are not as frequent when compared to their prime years ...
lol, rafa goes AWOL/gets eliminated early in many tournaments in 2nd half of the season ...on fast HC .... where his return numbers would suffer ....
agassi's numbers include all of his years, including when he was in a slump ....
rafa's don't include his decline years that will surely come .....
also, like I showed hewitt's return stats on grass and HC are better, this is including his fall years, including that he's played more on faster HC tournaments, including that rafa's ground game is better than his ....
that's not a good argument, since 2 slams on HC has been the case even before rafa/fed had started training for tennis ....
like I said, nalbandian had rafa on the ropes and was completely outplaying him in IW 2009 ...and nalbandian was better in 2003-07 ..
yeah, only 2007 is the best federer has played @ the AO, wimbledon 2007 was after 2003,05,06 comfortably and behind 2004 as well ...so , it doesn't even out ...
yes, oh LOL, federer nowhere close to his best tennis still managed to push murray at his best to 5 ... your boy rafa , right in his prime couldn't even get a set ( in the first 2 sets when he was fit anyways ) in AO 2010 vs murray ...
fed's tennis in the last 2 matches were nowhere close to what they were at his peak ....he grit it out through his determination .... you seriously need to get yourself tested if you really think otherwise ...
no, there are plenty of times when players take off the pace/action on the their serve to get more first serves in ; plenty of times when players go for their first serve, even if the no of first serves in goes down ...
for example, take these 2 matches for rafa vs fed:
64% first serves in,
1st serve speed : 179 kph
2nd serve speed : 143 kph
At AO 2012,
77% first serves in,
1st serve speed : 172 kph
2nd serve speed : 137 kph
of course the speeds don't tell whole the story as they don't show the amount of slice/kick on the serves
what matters is how they serve in that match as a whole ...
fact is you haven't watched the USO 2004 final >> hence cluelessly keep saying hewitt played badly and that federer served badly ...
why on earth would you expect him to make more UEs at wimbledon , which is quite a bit faster than the AO ?
and none of their RG matches were as long as this ....
not to forget rafa was going for quite a bit more in this final than he did in the semi - he had the same no of winners in a shorter match vs a better defender .. (federer vs verdasco )
he served quite well in AO 2009, not much of a difference in the quality of serving in both of their AO matches tbh ;
you are just thick to consider only one factor : % of first serve ...see the stats of the mphs posted above ...
and again, how many better matches has rafa played at the AO really ?
if he had a serious problem , he wouldn't have played doubles ... we'd have heard about injury problems if they 'existed', before the match ..... he just got blown off because federer adjusted better to the conditions and was the superior player ....
no denying that nadal played well, but the main factor in that match was fed being sick ...
Yeah but if Fed's movement was considerably worse by 2011, it would've been even worst in 2012 yet he was able to move and return well enough and consistently enough to win the title. My point is this decline is nowhere near as bad as you *******s like to make out. I get it, you want your hero to be considered FAR superior to everybody else, but it is not the case.
Old Agassi took peak height of powers Fed to the limit at USO. Even in 2005 it was pretty close until the fourth set and that was AFTER Agassi came off a multitude of 5 setters.
And Agassi was ailed by his birth defect which drastically affected his spine.
Rafa's HC return numbers are also not very far off Novak's either...
And since winning Wimbledon Rafa has:
2008 USO semi, 2009 AO champion, 2009 USO semi, 2010 AO quarters, 2010 USO champion, 2011 AO quarters, 2011 USO final and 2012 AO final. THere's a LOT of HC matches there and no early round exits. As for the 2nd half Masters events he has won MOntreal in August 2005, Madrid in October 2005, got to the final in Shanghai 2009, won Toronto in 2008, got to the final in Paris in 2007 and won the Olympics in 2008.
He's not the greatest HC player ever but he's pretty damn good only Cincy is where he struggles the most.
Hey clueless, Fed grew up on outdoor clay. It wouldn't matter how hard anyone trains for clay Rafa would always be better than them, that is obvious because even though Fed trained on outdoor clay he still couldn't even win 2 sets against Rafa at RG.
BUt then he got bageled in the third set. I would say mainly because Nalby was carrying confidence from his previous wins over Rafa and Rafa likely wasn't confident against him. But in the end Rafa won which is what would've most likely happened had they met at AO, Nalby would've pushed him, no doubt, but in the end Rafa would beat him over 5 sets.
It doesn't even out? I'm assuming you mean count? Now here's where you are completely contradicting yourself. First you say Fed played his best match in the final in 07 and the previous rounds shouldn't be used as an indicator of form. Now you say the previous rounds count. Make up your mind.
Fact is nobody predicted Rafa would take Fed to 5. Just like you are predicting that if Rafa had met Fed at AO07 he wouldn't be able to take 2 sets. Truth is we'll never know, but the facts are Rafa has always given Fed trouble in every single major match even 2006 WIM wasn't that easy for Fed, so it's safer to say Fed would've struggled vs Rafa than it is to say Fed would've lost one set max.
Well Rafa did retire the match so nobody can really say that Rafa wouldn't have fought back if he remained fit.
And quit with the Fed nowhere close to his best tennis, he is playing close to his best fool, his ground game was very good last night and his serving improved after the first set.
Fed's problem was Murray was serving very well and Fed struggled with that big time. BTW 21 year old Rafa pushed peak Fed in his best major and then beat him when just turned 22. Fed never even close to Rafa on clay despite growing up playing on the surface ...
I did watch the match fool and saw Hewitt get belted because he has no weapons that can hurt the top 4. Hewitt was a pushover and I have no doubt in my mind that if peak Rafa, Novak or Murray faced him in that final they would've thumped him as well.
The RG matches were also nowhere near it unless you think Rafa would've made 13 UE's in the 5th set if the 07 final went that far, despite making only 28 in the previous 4 sets... LOL.
Rafa had to play out of his comfort zone and be more aggressive because he had that epic against Verdasco and wanted to avoud a long match as much as possible. Now we all know that didn't happen but the tactic was there. He was not playing his usual game which is most likely why Fed was able to win a couple of sets.
Best means better than any other form. He was not at his best in that final. For one he played better vs Verdasco and that was clearly because he wasn't as tired heading into that match.
NOt saying it was serious at that stage, but Nadal is a hypochondriac and feeling any niggles would've definitely threw him off his game.
No, the main factor was Rafa playing a brand of tennis Federer had never seen before. Federer was seen by many as a player with no weaknesses, until that match where Nadal's wicked topspin exposed Fed's OHBH.
And Nadal has been FAR superior against Fed on many more occasions and not only on clay.
OMG!!! And so it goes on.
Guys seriously no one else has the time to read and divulge this.
You're on your own.
Swap emails or numbers and carry on the discussion there.
LOL sorry dude, I think you're right we always drag on and on and on and on.
Think it's time we realise we'll never convince each other of anything and nobody else is reading our stuff either anyway (except for maybe Mandy who is even more delusional).
Most likely he'll respond to me again with the same crap but it's ok I'll ignore the troll.
no, you are just thick enough not to get that decline doesn't mean you can't play good tennis ,it just means you can't reproduce it as consistently as at your prime
I never ever said federer is FAR superior to everyone else ; just that he has a darn good case for being superior to everyone on every surface bar clay ... it isn't a stretch to favour him over any other player prime to prime , off clay .......
I know he's a pretty good player on HC ... What I mentioned he was AWOL many times on fast HC, mostly in the 2nd half of the year, that "inflates" his return stats on HC ....especially compared to agassi who played quite a bit more on fast HC ...
I wasn't talking about where they trained, rather that the circumstances of the slams they'd play on where well known before they started training ....therefore 2 slams on HC and one on clay isn't "unfair" to rafa ...
yeah, only in nalby in 2003-07 was quite a bit better .... I didn't say nalby would definitely win, but rafa would've had one hell of a struggle and could've possibly lost ...
wimbledon 2006 was two easy sets, and two tough sets, which they split ...
given murray had all the momentum and was outplaying him , I don't think so ...
his ground game was decent, his serving was sorely lacking in pop >> but then you wouldn't say that because you are an effin' hypocrite ...
no, you didn't ... you haven't watched much of hewitt either considering you think nadal has a comparable return to him ...
the no of points in RG 2007 final in the first 4 sets were quite a bit less than the first 4 sets in the AO 2009 final ......
he executed his game darn well ... you got one match, one match , where he was possibly a bit better ? LOL !! he played differently in the semis and finals and was IMO equally effective in different ways in both ...
the fact is fed's serve missing was a darn crucial aspect in that final ....
lol, again , a bunch of excuses ... no one heard anything about any injury until after ....players play with small niggles/injuries many times ... but they don't usually affect them ...
yeah, because hewitt, nalby etc hadn't taken advantage of fed's BH until then, which can be inconsistent at times :roll:
federer was just starting his domination then , having won TMC 2003, AO 2004, IW 2004 ...
off clay, he's been FAR superior only twice - both times at miami ...once when fed was sick ...
Look you're stirring things up again with your last sentence.
I don't know what this is all about and I'm sorry I just don't have the time or energy to read the 1000 or so long posts going back and forward but you do seriously have to try and shake hands, agree to disagree NICELY. And move on.
I've got a life outside now. I have to go.
Separate names with a comma.