Does Nadal's 2010 USO feel empty?

[-RF-]

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Nadal basically got his USO the same way Fed got his FO. Just hang in there long enough until the perennial champ finally falters. The difference being Federer was actually the 2nd best clay player since 2005. You can't say the same for Nadal on hardcourts.....and Federer's draw at the 09' FO was not cupcake at all.

More like the difference is Nadal on hard courts always had a fighting chance vs anyone, including Federer, and happened to capatilize on one of his 3 very good chances to win the event- 2008, 2010, 2011, and would have defended in 2011 if a certain player didnt happen to hit his all time peak that very year. While Federer has one player he had no chance in hell of ever beating at RG, and was able to capatilize on the year he didnt have to face him, his one and only ever chance ever of winning RG and he eked it out after surviving a number of scares.

Federer was never Nadal's problem in winning U.S Opens or any other slam. Nadal's problem was always other players. Federer is pretty much irrelevant to Nadal's career, unlike the reverse where Nadal has a tremendous impact on Federer's. Nadal has lost what, probably 1 slam (2007 Wimbledon) due to Federer, and that is all, lol! In the event Nadal was playing well enough to win the U.S Open Federer, especialy a past his prime Federer, would his be his last worry. Federer is the one who probably thought about having to face an in form Nadal in the final when he had match point in the semis vs Djokovic and went oh sh1t and lost.

Federer's draw at the 2009 French was quite easy btw, even easier than Nadal's at the 2010 U.S Open. Atleast Djokovic in a slam final on hard courts is way better than anyone Federer faced at the 2009 French, which alone makes his draw tougher even if the rest is roughly the same. Soderling while he was playing very well that event, will never be a tough opponent in a slam final, like the other second tier players of this era doesnt have a champions mentality at all; Del Potro the hard court specialist on clay, and who even at his peak was generally below the caliber of players people like even Djokovic 1.0 version were, an old Haas on his worst surface, journeyman clay court specialist Acasuso, etc...

[edmondsm]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

More like the difference is Nadal on hard courts always had a fighting chance vs anyone, including Federer, and happened to capatilize on one of his 3 very good chances to win the event- 2008, 2010, 2011, and would have defended in 2011 if a certain player didnt happen to hit his all time peak that very year. While Federer has one player he had no chance in hell of ever beating at RG, and was able to capatilize on the year he didnt have to face him, his one and only ever chance ever of winning RG and he eked it out after surviving a number of scares.

Federer's draw at the 2009 French was quite easy btw, even easier than Nadal's at the 2010 U.S Open. Atleast Djokovic in a slam final on hard courts is way better than anyone Federer faced at the 2009 French, which alone makes his draw tougher even if the rest is roughly the same. Soderling while he was playing very well that event, will never be a tough opponent in a slam final, like the other second tier players of this era doesnt have a champions mentality at all; Del Potro the hard court specialist on clay, and who even at his peak was generally below the caliber of players people like even Djokovic 1.0 version were, an old Haas on his worst surface, journeyman clay court specialist Acasuso, etc...

Sorry but, no. More like Nadal had the ability to LOSE to anyone on hardcourts for many years while barely gutting out wins. Just look at his record. Losses to Blake, Youzney, Ferrer at the USO. He was just finally able to survive enough abuse on his body to claim a couple hardcourt slams.

All the while Federer was making every FO final. And his 2009 there was certainly tough, having to get through Monfils, Delpo, and then Soderling who took out Nadal and ended up making the final again.

Nadal's form was great at the 2011 USO, but his draw was incredibly lucky. Getting Novak after he had played a 5 setter with Fed along with a 5 setter early in the tourney was the icing on the cake.

[ark_28]

I wouldn't say empty he played well and served great! But on those fast courts he certainly dodged a bullet in not facing Isner! The follow g year Isner became the only man to ever take Nadal to 5 sets at the French Open! So just imagine the damage he could have done to Rafa in NYC in 2010 had he not played a shocker in R3

[nikdom]

Originally Posted by dudeski

I am glad you finally stopped pretending being Federer's fan.

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Nadal basically got his USO the same way Fed got his FO. Just hang in there long enough until the perennial champ finally falters. The difference being Federer was actually the 2nd best clay player since 2005. You can't say the same for Nadal on hardcourts.....and Federer's draw at the 09' FO was not cupcake at all.

Originally Posted by Steve0904

Overall 3rd best since 2005, sure. But Federer was 2nd best on clay by tournament format by virtue of making the final every year before he actually won the French. The same cannot be said for Nadal on HC.

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Sorry but, no. More like Nadal had the ability to LOSE to anyone on hardcourts for many years while barely gutting out wins. Just look at his record. Losses to Blake, Youzney, Ferrer at the USO. He was just finally able to survive enough abuse on his body to claim a couple hardcourt slams.

All the while Federer was making every FO final. And his 2009 there was certainly tough, having to get through Monfils, Delpo, and then Soderling who took out Nadal and ended up making the final again.

Nadal's form was great at the 2011 USO, but his draw was incredibly lucky. Getting Novak after he had played a 5 setter with Fed along with a 5 setter early in the tourney was the icing on the cake.

Agree with all these points.

[nikdom]

Originally Posted by Magnetite

It would have been sweeter if he beat Fed in the final, but it wasn't an 'empty' victory.

Nadal was playing lights out tennis, and his serve was the best it's ever been.

Where was that serve before and after? Nadal didn't win any of the lead up tournaments to the USO and that powerful serve disappeared just as soon as it became a factor at the USO. Nobody learns to serve bombs overnight. Even if we give credit for somehow doing that, which I did initially, how does it simply go away?

[kragster]

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Sorry but, no. More like Nadal had the ability to LOSE to anyone on hardcourts for many years while barely gutting out wins. Just look at his record. Losses to Blake, Youzney, Ferrer at the USO. He was just finally able to survive enough abuse on his body to claim a couple hardcourt slams.

This is a gross exaggeration. Since 2006, here's who Nadal has lost to at hard court slams:

Djokovic
Murray
Del potro
Ferrer
Tsonga
Gonzales
Youzhny
Blake

Yes he is more vulnerable on hard courts than Federer is on clay but its hardly the case that he is vulnerable to anyone and everyone. He consistently makes the quarters or semis of every HC slam and post 2009 has made the finals/won in 4 of 7 HC slam attempts.

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Nadal's form was great at the 2011 USO, but his draw was incredibly lucky. Getting Novak after he had played a 5 setter with Fed along with a 5 setter early in the tourney was the icing on the cake.

At the end of the day people are measured by their accomplishments. And on accomplishments Djokovic+ Murray+ Post prime Fed is far greater competition than Hewitt+Safin+Nalbo +Baggy. Not to mention that it's much easier to win a slam final against a first time slam finalist vs a player who has been in multiple slam finals. You can argue subjectively that Soderling was red hot blah blah but at the end of the day Djokovic >>>>>>>>>>>Soderling. Unless you're into this 1.0/2.0 business but last I checked on the ATP website, there was only one record for Djokovic. Side note - In this regard Murray has always had the worst end of the deal, having to face multi-slam winners in all his finals.

Look we can stop being hypocritical and say each player benefited from an opportunity that they deserved in form or another, or we can nitpick at who had an easier draws until the night is long.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by edmondsm

Sorry but, no. More like Nadal had the ability to LOSE to anyone on hardcourts for many years while barely gutting out wins. Just look at his record. Losses to Blake, Youzney, Ferrer at the USO.

Yes losing to those players at the same ages the so called hard court Federer was losing to Mirnyi, Nalbandian, Haas, and Nalbandian in the round of 16 stager or earlier at the U.S Open, not making his first U.S Open quarterfinal until he was 23 (Nadal made his at 20). Thanks for playing.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by kragster

Also Nadal reached the finals of AO 2012 and USO 2011 so it must be said that it's not that USO 2010 was the only time Nadal made a HC slam final.

Not forgetting, of course, the final of AO 2009 which he won!

[DeShaun]

I am starting to realize that Rafa has not been injured so much as he has not been able to maintain his very higest level of play for periods in matches as long as he used to be able to. So, to me this means that he can impose his will, usually off of the ground--but increasingly with his serve believe it or not--in winning four or five points consecutively just about whenever he wants or needs to; but he cannot sustain that level for longer than a few games at most nowadays. And so, off of clay it means that guys like Novak and Roger have only to weather those drastic bursts or jumps in the level of Rafa's play before they reassert themselves. Rafa still plays the highest level of tennis out there, I believe--a level that (when he turns it on) absolutely nobody can match...but he cannot keep it firing as long as before and this is why he will not win another major off of clay IMO.

[smoledman]

Originally Posted by DeShaun

I am starting to realize that Rafa has not been injured so much as he has not been able to maintain his very higest level of play for periods in matches as long as he used to be able to. So, to me this means that he can impose his will, usually off of the ground--but increasingly with his serve believe it or not--in winning four or five points consecutively just about whenever he wants or needs to; but he cannot sustain that level for longer than a few games at most nowadays. And so, off of clay it means that guys like Novak and Roger have only to weather those drastic bursts or jumps in the level of Rafa's play before they reassert themselves. Rafa still plays the highest level of tennis out there, I believe--a level that (when he turns it on) absolutely nobody can match...but he cannot keep it firing as long as before and this is why he will not win another major off of clay IMO.

That describes Federer from 2004-2006.

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by nikdom

He didn't have to beat Roger who won there so many times.

Who cares? The dominant players at USO post 2009 (other than Rafa himself) were Djoko and Murray. And Nadal did have to beat Djoko in the final.

[PSNELKE]

Nikdom's still a whippersnapper. Let him talk.

[90's Clay]

Nadal would have CRUSHED Roger at Flushing that year. Please.

Nadal was peaking there. His serve was a beast, and he was ultra aggressive.. Fed wouldn't have stood a chance

[namelessone]

Originally Posted by nikdom

Where was that serve before and after? Nadal didn't win any of the lead up tournaments to the USO and that powerful serve disappeared just as soon as it became a factor at the USO. Nobody learns to serve bombs overnight. Even if we give credit for somehow doing that, which I did initially, how does it simply go away?

You're either very forgetful or trolling.

Nadal has the "super serve" not just for USO, but for tourneys after as well, his serve helped him a lot in Tokyo as well. But the problem is that it messed up his shoulder so he reverted to his more traditional serve by AO 2011. So that serve wasn't in effect for 2 weeks but all throughout the autumn season.

Heck, there were some signs of the super serve before:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1khEO9u-VbQ

In a match that he LOST, in Cincy.

Even if you believe the "Nadal doped to get that serve" theory(that is what you seem to be implying), then I ask you: Why didn't Nadal just cycle again anytime in the next 2 years to get that booming serve? Nadal never served that well again, except maybe the first set in WB 2011 final.

Heck, even resident silent ban aficionado and expert drakulie doesn't believe Nadal doped to get that serve and yet some of you do. Boggles the mind.

[nikdom]

Originally Posted by namelessone

You're either very forgetful or trolling.

Nadal has the "super serve" not just for USO, but for tourneys after as well, his serve helped him a lot in Tokyo as well. But the problem is that it messed up his shoulder so he reverted to his more traditional serve by AO 2011. So that serve wasn't in effect for 2 weeks but all throughout the autumn season.

Heck, there were some signs of the super serve before:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1khEO9u-VbQ

In a match that he LOST, in Cincy.

Even if you believe the "Nadal doped to get that serve" theory(that is what you seem to be implying), then I ask you: Why didn't Nadal just cycle again anytime in the next 2 years to get that booming serve? Nadal never served that well again, except maybe the first set in WB 2011 final.

Heck, even resident silent ban aficionado and expert drakulie doesn't believe Nadal doped to get that serve and yet some of you do. Boggles the mind.

Really? where do you guys get this crap? Uncle Toni?

1 min this guy is serving bombs, next day his shoulder is messed up. One day he's running around like a rabbit, the next day he's retired because his knee's are shattered?

Gimme a break. This guy has to be the most impressive athlete since Lance Armstrong. You know how that guy did it right...

[abmk]

Originally Posted by kragster

At the end of the day people are measured by their accomplishments. And on accomplishments Djokovic+ Murray+ Post prime Fed is far greater competition than Hewitt+Safin+Nalbo +Baggy.

eh, what ? federer faced djoker more times in slams than rafa did ... 10 times since montreal 2007 in fact ... rafa only faced him 6 times since then ...

and you missed that federer also dealt with younger nadal, roddick, older agassi

Originally Posted by kragster

Not to mention that it's much easier to win a slam final against a first time slam finalist vs a player who has been in multiple slam finals. You can argue subjectively that Soderling was red hot blah blah but at the end of the day Djokovic >>>>>>>>>>>Soderling. Unless you're into this 1.0/2.0 business but last I checked on the ATP website, there was only one record for Djokovic. Side note - In this regard Murray has always had the worst end of the deal, having to face multi-slam winners in all his finals.

Look we can stop being hypocritical and say each player benefited from an opportunity that they deserved in form or another, or we can nitpick at who had an easier draws until the night is long.

eh,no , not necessarily.... One would anyday face murray in the AO 2011 final or soderling in the RG 2010 final rather than tsonga in AO 2008 final or gonzalez in AO 2007 final ( or going a bit further back : safin in the USO 2000 final or hewitt in the USO 2001 final )

and again, djoker in the 2010 USO final was clearly better than soderling in RG 2009 final , but delpo in the FO 2009 SF was clearly better than djoker in the USO 2010 final , it's a no contest IMO ...

[namelessone]

Originally Posted by nikdom

Really? where do you guys get this crap? Uncle Toni?

1 min this guy is serving bombs, next day his shoulder is messed up. One day he's running around like a rabbit, the next day he's retired because his knee's are shattered?

Gimme a break. This guy has to be the most impressive athlete since Lance Armstrong. You know how that guy did it right...

You need to get your facts straight.

Not the next day but a couple of months later. Nadal had a improved serve(for most of the time, in some matches that autumn it did not click) in 2010 for USO, Bangkok,Tokio,Shangai and TMC(where he made his first final by beating guys like Murray,Roddick,Djokovic on HC indoors). In AO 2011 he dialed back on his serve from what I'd seen.

But still, let's assert that Nadal DOPED to get his serve for USO 2010 since that's what you are implying and he didn't actually have shoulder issues towards the end of the year.

It stands to reason that he would whip out the massive serve again at least ONCE since autumn 2010 but 2 YEARS(years in which Nadal reached another 5 slam finals) have passed and we haven't seen Nadal try to hit bombs again, it's still mostly his spin serve out wide with a slower speed.

Now I don't know about you but if I had the ability to get a powerful serve with the use of PED I would use as frequently as possible. And since the Federer warehouse has already established that Nadal is an all around awful person,a cheater of the highest magnitude, I don't see why he wouldn't use PED's to boost his serve as much as is humanly possible on a frequent basis.

I know I'm just bashing my head against the walls here trying to argue with a hater but just to know how off track you are again: drakulie, a fellow Nadal hater who believe that Nadal was already silently banned twice for doping, doesn't believe the super serve via PED theory. Why don't you have a talk with him about the Nadal super serve's appearance and disappearance?

[nikdom]

^^ Your reasoning is as convoluted as Nadal's excuses are unconvincing.

For someone who you guys believe is the strongest, best, invincible player of all time, from your very own conclusions seems an incredibly fragile fellow.

I say no one fluctuates between invincible and disabled without some serious 'boosting'

[namelessone]

Originally Posted by nikdom

^^ Your reasoning is as convoluted as Nadal's excuses are unconvincing.

For someone who you guys believe is the strongest, best, invincible player of all time, from your very own conclusions seems an incredibly fragile fellow.

All I ask is that you answer my not at all convoluted question:

If Nadal has a booming serve in his backpocket via PED, why doesn't he whip it out at every slam at least?

We know that you and other worthy posters have correctly identified Nadal as a cheater who ****es on the system and who is also backed from the inside(silent bans to cover up, Tony's influence, Mallorcan Mafia etc.) so why would he have qualms about pushing the super serve in our faces every other tournament?

For a guy with Nadal's(lack of)morals, it wouldn't make sense to ditch a superweapon. Did Nadal stop taking shady MTO's? Did Nadal stop wasting time? Did Nadal stop coaching? Then why did Nadal stop using PED's on his super serve? The dude is backed by the system, the fans and media are gullible enough to buy his crap(grip change, yeah right ) and yet he chooses to abandon a MAJOR weapon? Makes no sense.