Would Federer have won if Murray had not Knocked out Rafa?

dropshot winner

Hall of Fame
Hard to say.

Federer has always been a mental midget and stupid tactician against Nadal, save for a few matches (like Madrid). I think he would've won, Nadal wasn't playing as well as last year and Federer played even better.
 

roysid

Hall of Fame
He would have lost. That lefty Nadal forehand he swings it so much that Fed is out of position defending it. From there it's simple for Nadal, he will either pound it again and again or exploit the open forehand.

No other player, particularly right handers can hit with such swing and get him out of position.
 

diggler

Hall of Fame
I think Murray's 2 handed backhand matches up so much better than Roger's backhand against Rafa's forehand. Murray does Roger's dirty work for him.
 

dropshot winner

Hall of Fame
He would have lost. That lefty Nadal forehand he swings it so much that Fed is out of position defending it. From there it's simple for Nadal, he will either pound it again and again or exploit the open forehand.

No other player, particularly right handers can hit with such swing and get him out of position.

True, but Nadal played at his best ever level last year, Federer served like crap and still almost won.

Considering how much better Federer served this year and that Nadal wasn't fully confident it's likely that Federer would've won this time around. Unfortunately that didn't happen.
 

miyagi

Professional
Nadal wasnt in great shape, and until Murray match played quite poorly, although I'd like to think Nadal would have been competitive I don't think it would have been.

Federer would have taken this I believe!
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
If Murray had not knocked out Cilic, Cilic would have creamed Roger.

Had Cilic not upset the great Tomic, Tomic would have creamed Roger and won AO.

Had Roger not beaten Davydenko, Davy would have creamed Murray and won. Hey, THAT would have been sweet.
 

prjacobs

Hall of Fame
Sadly, Nadal will never be what he was. His body simply can't take his game. So "fully fit" is a definition that will be different from a few years ago. And I think that the tour has adjusted to his style. Players now take him out of his comfort zone. That's why he hurt his knee against Murray. He was scrambling, reacting. His game is not built for longevity. I hope I'm wrong, but based on his results and watching him play, I think he'll never dominate the tour again.
 
Last edited:

srvnvly

Hall of Fame
(Assuming Nadal was fully fit.)

Discuss.

Assuming Nadal was fit; assuming Djokovic was in shape; assuming Davydenko's ego was in check - this is a bunch of bollux. Fed shows up every slam, ready to play. Period. This is why he is the GOAT. That some of the other top pros are fit one slam and not fit, or not ready to play for another, is ridiculous.
 

Stinkdyr

Professional
Nada was the greatest player on earth for a time.
Safin was the greatest on earth for a short time.
 

markwillplay

Hall of Fame
trye, but he can beat Rog sorry..he can. Not saying he would have but Nadal has Rog's number and can compete with him tit for tat mentally. Injusies and pains start to go away when you are playing the number one guy. Nadal will become the hunter now and even though I have posted here that I think it is over for him (still do) I think that knowing he can beat the number one in the world and goat will keepi him hungery perhaps.
 

eagle

Hall of Fame
Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

What is Fed was eliminated by Andreev during the 1st round?

What if Isner had Davy had beaten Fed?

What if Nadal lost in the the first round?

What if TW sold women's lingerie instead of tennis gear?

What if the earth was a triangle?

What if ....

r,
eagle
 

coloskier

Legend
I think Murray's 2 handed backhand matches up so much better than Roger's backhand against Rafa's forehand. Murray does Roger's dirty work for him.

Nadal's knees did Roger's dirty work for him, and will continue to do Roger's dirty work for him. Until Nadal bites the bullet and gets scoped and does the 6-8 month rehab required, this will continue to plague him for the rest of his career.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

What is Fed was eliminated by Andreev during the 1st round?

What if Isner had Davy had beaten Fed?

What if Nadal lost in the the first round?

What if TW sold women's lingerie instead of tennis gear?

What if the earth was a triangle?

What if ....

r,
eagle

sadly,i can't answer any, but the bolded one has Fedace's name written all over it.
 

pc1

G.O.A.T.
None of this speculation matters, you just hope that all of the top players are healthy so you can see interesting matches. Only Nadal seems to have the mental capacity to stand up to Federer in big matches. Most of the others seem to wither away with the possible future exception of del Potro.

Djokovic has beaten Federer at the Australian but Murray's performance yesterday under pressure was not good. It was clear he had the weight of all British Tennis on his shoulders.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
The answer is NO. If Murray let Rafa win, he still loses to Cilic in the next round.:roll:
 

JoshDragon

Hall of Fame
Hard to say.

Federer has always been a mental midget and stupid tactician against Nadal, save for a few matches (like Madrid). I think he would've won, Nadal wasn't playing as well as last year and Federer played even better.

No, you're wrong. Roger had 71 winners to 64 unforced errors last year against Nadal (+7) and this year against Murray, he had 46 winners to 42 unforced errors (+4).
 

davey25

Banned
If Nadal had beaten Murray he would have lost to Cilic who destroyed him last fall. As it was Nadal was injured and didnt even finish his match with Murray (which I was somehow called a ********* for pointing out, LOL!). Nadal wasnt playing well enough to beat Federer even if they did play, and hasnt beaten a top 10 player on hard courts apart from one win over Tsonga in a long time. This is a pointless thread.
 
I think so. Federer was serving well this AO, unlike the previous one. It would have been enough to win in 4 or 5..

No, you're wrong. Roger had 71 winners to 64 unforced errors last year against Nadal (+7) and this year against Murray, he had 46 winners to 42 unforced errors (+4).

Not comparable. Conditions were much slower this year.
 

jackson vile

G.O.A.T.
(Assuming Nadal was fully fit.)

Discuss.

I predicted a long time ago that Roger was wining this one no matter what, that is satistics. Just like there will be more slams for Rafa reguardless of whether or not he really has an injury.

Roger was winning this one no matter what, he got it done!
 

JennyS

Hall of Fame
I think so. Federer was serving well this AO, unlike the previous one. It would have been enough to win in 4 or 5..



Not comparable. Conditions were much slower this year.

Not to mention there were two fewer sets to rack up winners (although did Fed get any in the 5th set last year?)
 

Cyan

Hall of Fame
Rafa has to be playing great tennis to reach slam finals. That's why he has won almost all his slam finals.
 

paulorenzo

Hall of Fame
trye, but he can beat Rog sorry..he can. Not saying he would have but Nadal has Rog's number and can compete with him tit for tat mentally. Injusies and pains start to go away when you are playing the number one guy. Nadal will become the hunter now and even though I have posted here that I think it is over for him (still do) I think that knowing he can beat the number one in the world and goat will keepi him hungery perhaps.

last time they have played, roger beat rafa on rafa's favorite surface. in straights.
 

Wes_Loves_Dunlop

Professional
^
i agree. Fed ca just cruise through every match, while others have to work to make it to the semi's.

Nadal could not have beaten Roger at all because he would not have even made it there
 

clayman2000

Hall of Fame
Fed is so talented he can reach slam finals even playing subpar tennis:shock:

Really?

You would call Federer's play against Tsonga subpar?
What about his play against Djokovic at the USO. Or against Haas at Wimby. Or against Del Po and Roddick in Australia?

Almost every tournament involves a Federer beat down in the later rounds. You cannot do that playing subbpar tennis
 

Cyan

Hall of Fame
I have seen Fed playing cr@p tennis and still reaching slam finals. The others like Rafa, Nole, Murray, Del Po need to be playing great tennis to reach slam finals. So they don't reach as many finals as Fed. Fact.
 

JoshDragon

Hall of Fame
Really?

You would call Federer's play against Tsonga subpar?
What about his play against Djokovic at the USO. Or against Haas at Wimby. Or against Del Po and Roddick in Australia?

Almost every tournament involves a Federer beat down in the later rounds. You cannot do that playing subbpar tennis

No, Cyan said that Roger could reach the semis with subpar tennis. Those matches that you're referring to are all in the semis of the tournaments.
 

JeMar

Legend
Nadal has not been fit since he lost his first match at a 10 and unders tournament in Mallorca.
 

World Beater

Hall of Fame
tough to say..but who cares...winning grand slams is not just about playing rafa nadal.

if that were the case, then sampras would have fewer majors if we asked him to play stich, krajicek and ferreira all the time.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
The fed fans can talk big now, but believe me they were celebrating big time when nadal got beat by murray.
They can deny it all they want but the majority of them do not want to see nadal play their hero in a final again.They can only take seeing him cry like a little girl so many times.
 

AlpineCadet

Hall of Fame
The fed fans can talk big now, but believe me they were celebrating big time when nadal got beat by murray.
They can deny it all they want but the majority of them do not want to see nadal play their hero in a final again.They can only take seeing him cry like a little girl so many times.
Nadal summarizes the end of Fed, but he couldn't get past Murray? :oops:
 

DMan

Professional
(Assuming Nadal was fully fit.)

Discuss.

How about discussing this:

What actually happened:


Roger Federer won the 2010 Australian Open.

He beat Andy Murray in the final.

Andy Murray beat Rafael Nadal, who retired in the QF.

Roger Federer has never retired in a Grand Slam event.

Nadal wasn't fully fit (if that's true). That's his problem. Not Roger Federer's.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
The fed fans can talk big now, but believe me they were celebrating big time when nadal got beat by murray.

Where did you see this ? Is this the usual imagination of nadal fans ? On this forum when Fed loses, its the Nadal fans who celebrate. As can be seen by your immature final remark of crying.

They can deny it all they want but the majority of them do not want to see nadal play their hero in a final again.They can only take seeing him cry like a little girl so many times.
omg, don't be so bitter. Its not Roger's fault that Rafa is injured. Most Roger fans here gave Andy a very good chance of winning. Most of us assumed Andy was going to win.

Get a life.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
This is no imagination, but hey whatever you say dreamer.You are actually going to deny the fed fans celebrating when rafa loses? This proves how ignorant you are.

Also You say that most fed fans thought murray was going to win. You just make one dumb statement after another.I would suggest that you get a clue+ a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

dropshot winner

Hall of Fame
This is no imagination, but hey whatever you say dreamer.You are actually going to deny the fed fans celebrating when rafa loses? This proves how ignorant you are.

Also You say that most fed fans thought murray was going to win. You just make one dumb statement after another.I would suggest that you get a clue+ a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually a lot of people picked Murray over Nadal, no matter if they were Federer fans or not.
Nadal was by no means the overwhelming favorite for that QF.
 
Top