Are Murray and Djockovic on something?

[mariecon]

Originally Posted by Tony48

FAST hard courts are Nadal's worst surface, not indoor hard. And the tour finals are NOT considered a fast hard court.

Nadal's best result at Cincinnati (a fast hard court): semi-final
Nadal's best result at the tour finals/Rotterdam (both indoor hard): final



My point was that it can be your favorite surface and you can still lose.

Yes, Djokovic vs. Nadal on hard isn't EXACTLY the same as Federer vs. Nadal on indoor hard. I never said it was. I merely said that hard courts FAVOR Djokovic. That is a fact.



Oh, the irony. I was responding to YOUR sarcasm with some of my own. So apparently it's YOU that can't sense it.

But back to the topic at hand: if you don't think that Djokovic's record at the French is outstanding then you are in denial and probably need to stop watching tennis. How many other players can boast the kind of record that Djokovic has at the French?

It IS outstanding.

considering that what you said made no sense at all, how was I supposed to sense the sarcasm? I don't even know to whom you were referring when you said "Only losing to 4 different people IS an outstanding record." Maybe if you were clearer and used names I would have gotten your sarcasm.

As to your last question, well what on earth does that even have to do with Djokovic doping to the point of becoming superman in 2011? Nothing. Before 2011 he made it to 2 SF's at RG. He wasn't exactly cementing his legacy in the clay record books.

[mariecon]

Tony48 I now see why you are a "legend" here. You never give up. I'll let you have the last word. Go ahead.

[Tony48]

Originally Posted by mariecon

As to your last question, well what on earth does that even have to do with Djokovic doping to the point of becoming superman in 2011? Nothing. Before 2011 he made it to 2 SF's at RG. He wasn't exactly cementing his legacy in the clay record books.

Nice attempt at trying to move the goal posts. His record at the French was being used to show how well Djokovic does on clay. But now you're not impressed because it doesn't prove that he isn't "cementing his legacy in the clay record books" (something that NO ONE even claimed or insinuated)?

I'm done with you.

EDIT:

To reiterate: the point of me referencing Djokovic's clay record was to show that Djokovic is a very competent clay court player, NOT that he is one of the best clay courters ever. Your response shows me that you will change the argument whenever you like.

And you went out of your way to ignore my entire argument about Nadal's worst surface, so there's THAT, too.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Tony48

That wasn't my purpose. The purpose of my post was to demonstrate that Djokovic had the capabilities to beat Nadal on clay.

NO ONE has to demonstrate to you that Djokovic can beat Nadal on clay in straight sets. Merely showing that Djokovic can win is sufficient, since a win in a win. Did Federer have to demonstrate to you that he could bagel Nadal on clay after NEVER being able to beat Nadal on clay?.

Really? But, he didn't just beat him. That is the whole point. The point was to discuss how much of a leap in his form Djokovic had!

Originally Posted by Tony48

It has only been a YEAR. What the hell are you talking about??.

He had 3 chances to show his changed ability. Failed in all three.

But, that is what I said. We will see, if your theory works.

Originally Posted by Tony48

So who should Novak have to beat???.

Dude, the question is, who did he beat??

As for the future, Nadal will suffice.

Originally Posted by Tony48

SAre you saying that performance from one year is a direct indicator of what should/will happen the next? I don't quite understand your post (because it is so poorly worded), but if that's the case, then that's insane.

No, I am saying, that, in order your claims to be true, there should be future reflection of them in the reality. If there isn't, then it might not be the truth about what happened.

[Tony48]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

Really? But, he didn't just beat him. That is the whole point. The point was to discuss how much of a leap in his form Djokovic had!

Djokovic has to demonstrate that he can beat down Nadal on clay (which wasn't even a beat down, btw), but Federer is left unchecked when he bagels Nadal on Nadal's BEST surface and Nadal's WORST surface?

That is very interesting, to say the least.

He had 3 chances to show his changed ability. Failed in all three.

That only proves that Djokovic hasn't done something within the time frame that YOU prefer. Your personal schedule for Djokovic has no bearing on his ability to perform anywhere.

Djokovic may not beat Nadal on clay again for another 2 years. The fact that you think that he must is silly. What's to stop you from suggesting that he must straight set Nadal at Roland Garros, too?

Dude, the question is, who did he beat??

You said he didn't beat anyone of any importance. Elaborate as to why that is.

No, I am saying, that, in order your claims to be true, there should be future reflection of them in the reality. If there isn't, then it might not be the truth about what happened.

Ummmm....it WAS reflected in the future. That future was the year of 2011. Retrospectively, his years leading up to 2011 collectively demonstrated that he could put together season of 2011 that he did.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Tony48

Djokovic has to demonstrate that he can beat down Nadal on clay (which wasn't even a beat down, btw), but Federer is left unchecked when he bagels Nadal on Nadal's BEST surface and Nadal's WORST surface?

That is very interesting, to say the least..

It is very interesting for someone, who doesn't know what else to say.

Originally Posted by Tony48

That only proves that Djokovic hasn't done something within the time frame that YOU prefer. Your personal schedule for Djokovic has no bearing on his ability to perform anywhere.

Oh, I see that you have no intention whatsoever to stand behind your claims. Your argument, as it is, is, that Djokovic may never repeat anythig like that, but all the talk about his improvement would still apply. Laughable, but not unexpected.

Originally Posted by Tony48

Djokovic may not beat Nadal on clay again for another 2 years. The fact that you think that he must is silly. What's to stop you from suggesting that he must straight set Nadal at Roland Garros, too?.

What is silly is, thatyou think, that a pattern can appear just like that and disappear just like that.

You believe in Fairies and Capricorns, son?

A single odd event can pass for coincidence. A pattern, like the one in 2011 cannot. It has to have foundations. Djokovic didn't straightset Nadal at RG twice, so I cannot relate your example to anythig real. My suggestions are based on what happened. Wrap your head around that (if you can).

Originally Posted by Tony48

You said he didn't beat anyone of any importance. Elaborate as to why that is.

That is a fact.

Originally Posted by Tony48

Ummmm....it WAS reflected in the future. That future was the year of 2011.

Oh, I didn't know, that he displayed that form before 2011. Sorry, you must live in another reality.

Originally Posted by Tony48

Retrospectively, his years leading up to 2011 collectively demonstrated that he could put together season of 2011 that he did.

They did?

So, I will take your word, that you expected season like 2011.

Oh, wait, you didn't.

[mariecon]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

Oh, I didn't know, that he displayed that form before 2011. Sorry, you must live in another reality.

Why are you wasting your time? This will go on forever. Just let him have the last word and he'll be happy.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by mariecon

Why are you wasting your time? This will go on forever. Just let him have the last word and he'll be happy.

You are probably right.

[Tony48]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

It is very interesting for someone, who doesn't know what else to say.

You have double standards and are merely surprised (and probably frustrated) that someone is calling you out on them. It's beyond the realm of possibilities for Djokovic to beat Nadal on clay but for Federer, bageling him on clay is just as normal as Sun rising.

Double standards.

I no longer feel compelled to defend Djokovic because you play by different rules when it comes to Federer.

Oh, I see that you have no intention whatsoever to stand behind your claims. Your argument, as it is, is, that Djokovic may never repeat anythig like that, but all the talk about his improvement would still apply. Laughable, but not unexpected.

When Federer bagels Nadal on clay again, then Djokovic can beat Nadal on clay again

What is silly is, thatyou think, that a pattern can appear just like that and disappear just like that.

What pattern? Two wins over Nadal, and it's a pattern? Your logic is not too sound.

That is a fact.

It appears as if you realized that you made a statement that you are unable to back up. Fair enough. Next time, check your facts before making such a declaration.

Oh, I didn't know, that he displayed that form before 2011. Sorry, you must live in another reality.

Displayed that form? No. Showed promising signs of being able to put together an amazing season? Yes.

They did?

So, I will take your word, that you expected season like 2011.

Oh, wait, you didn't.

Just like I'll take your word that you expected Federer to win as many slams as he did within the timeframe that he did.

[dafinch]

Originally Posted by Tony48

Djokovic lead the hard court H2H before 2011. Acting all surprised that Novak continued that trend (IW, Miami & U.S. Open and Australian Open) is a bit ridiculous.

Are you surprised when Federer beats Nadal at the WTF despite their lopsided H2H? Everything clicked for him in 2011 and he got better at what he was ALREADY doing.

And I already addressed the clay situation. Did you even read what I posted?

Excellent points, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that on all surfaces besides clay prior to 2011, the record between Nole and BP was dead even-his "dominance" consisted entirely of his edge on dirt. So, acting like Nole turned things around everywhere is silly. Btw, when's the last time that Nadal won a non dirt tournament? How about him successfully defending a non dirt tournament(Pretty sure the answer to the latter is, "never")?

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Tony48

You have double standards and are merely surprised (and probably frustrated) that someone is calling you out on them. It's beyond the realm of possibilities for Djokovic to beat Nadal on clay but for Federer, bageling him on clay is just as normal as Sun rising.

Double standards.

Federer bageling Nadal on clay is a SINGLE occurence.Djokovic beating Nadal like a drum everywhere and straightsettig him twice on clay of all surfaces is a pattern. Do you understand the difference between the two? Apparently not.

Originally Posted by Tony48

I no longer feel compelled to defend Djokovic because you play by different rules when it comes to Federer.

So weak, but its OK.

Originally Posted by Tony48

What pattern? Two wins over Nadal, and it's a pattern? Your logic is not too sound.

7 wins in a row. On all surfaces. Are you going to tell me, that Djokovic is considered a better grasscourt player as well? Taking down 2 time Wimbledon champ and 4 time finalist(at the time) like it is nothing.

Yeah, you sound like you know what you are talking about.

Originally Posted by Tony48

It appears as if you realized that you made a statement that you are unable to back up. Fair enough. Next time, check your facts before making such a declaration.

It appears, that you cannot understand simple sentences.

List all the great claycourters, that Djokovic defeated while winning his clay tourneys before 2011!

Originally Posted by Tony48

Just like I'll take your word that you expected Federer to win as many slams as he did within the timeframe that he did.

The difference being, that I never said such a thing and you did.

So you admit, that you didn't, despite claiming the opposite a few posts ago?

[Tony48]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

Federer bageling Nadal on clay is a SINGLE occurence.Djokovic beating Nadal like a drum everywhere and straightsettig him twice on clay of all surfaces is a pattern. Do you understand the difference between the two? Apparently not.

I'm just going to use your logic and say that Federer gave absolutely ZERO indication that he could bagel Nadal on clay. 2005? No. 2004? No. 2003? And then it happened.

What's up with that? I need an explanation! Otherwise, Federer was doing something fishy. What was he doing that was a "future reflection" of him being able to bagel Nadal on clay? I need answers. I'm surprised that the ATP hasn't looked into this.

7 wins in a row. On all surfaces. Are you going to tell me, that Djokovic is considered a better grasscourt player as well? Taking down 2 time Wimbledon champ and 4 time finalist(at the time) like it is nothing.

How can Federer bagel the greatest clay court player of all time? Taking down the reigning French Open champion like it was nothing. I need an explanation. There is absolutely no way that a legend like Nadal would lose like that to someone on their least favorite surface.

List all the great claycourters, that Djokovic defeated while winning his clay tourneys before 2011!

Name all of the great clay courters Federer beat that prepared him for utterly destroying Nadal on clay like never before. How is that even possible? Something is fishy about that. I need an explanation.

The difference being, that I never said such a thing and you did.

So you admit, that you didn't, despite claiming the opposite a few posts ago?

Did you expect it or not? If yes, please give me a detailed explanation of how he went from winning from 1 slam to winning 3 slams a year for 2 years. If no, then you believe that something is incredibly suspicious about Federer's sudden rise to being a super human.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Tony48

I'm just going to use your logic and say that Federer gave absolutely ZERO indication that he could bagel Nadal on clay. 2005? No. 2004? No. 2003? And then it happened.

What's up with that? I need an explanation! Otherwise, Federer was doing something fishy. What was he doing that was a "future reflection" of him being able to bagel Nadal on clay? I need answers. I'm surprised that the ATP hasn't looked into this.



How can Federer bagel the greatest clay court player of all time? Taking down the reigning French Open champion like it was nothing. I need an explanation. There is absolutely no way that a legend like Nadal would lose like that to someone on their least favorite surface.



Name all of the great clay courters Federer beat that prepared him for utterly destroying Nadal on clay like never before. How is that even possible? Something is fishy about that. I need an explanation.



Did you expect it or not? If yes, please give me a detailed explanation of how he went from winning from 1 slam to winning 3 slams a year for 2 years. If no, then you believe that something is incredibly suspicious about Federer's sudden rise to being a super human.

No, I did not.

As opposed to you, saying that you did about Djokovic.

Originally Posted by Tony48

...his years leading up to 2011 collectively demonstrated that he could put together season of 2011 that he did.

Oh, and, by the way, Federer repeated his high level performance several consecutive years, winning the same tournaments again and again. The very thing I am expecting from Djokovic, if he is to prove, that 2011 was not "fuelled" season. So, in reality it is the same standart for both players (unlike what you claim).

Apparently you do not have the capacity to realize that, and it should be told to you time and again.

I thought, that this description from one of our fellow posters describes your ability in a coversation.

Originally Posted by DeShaun

Friend, this is why I do not argue with women who seem unduly fond of the sound of their own voice, because I will end up wasting my time clarifying and refining their sloppily thrown together premises, patching all the holes in their leaky reasoning, only for them to become snippy and start inclining towards use of insecurity-evincing language that is a first cousin to ad homs, e.g., she hastens to suggest that you are somehow the one who is deluded.

Have a nice day!

[Tony48]

LOL, so now that Fed's bagel is being scrutinized, you avoid the questions altogether.

Interesting

[abmk]

Originally Posted by Tony48

LOL, so now that Fed's bagel is being scrutinized, you avoid the questions altogether.

rome 2006 - fed had taken set 4 : 6-2
RG 2006 - fed had taken set 1 : 6-1

next ?

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by abmk

rome 2006 - fed had taken set 4 : 6-2
RG 2006 - fed had taken set 1 : 6-1

next ?

Don't bother. It isn't worth it.

He refuses to recognize simple facts, like, for example, that there is a
difference between single event (a set) and a pattern (consequence of matches, featurig the same play, opponents and results at completely different venues and conditions).

Like I wrote, the description is tailormade for him.

Oh, expect that he says, that 6-1 is not like 6-0.

[abmk]

Before 2011, h2h was 16-7 in favour of nadal

all 7 of djokovic's wins were on HC and *all* were in *straights* ... he won all those by blowing nadal off court

nadal outlasted him every other time, including on HC ....

the pattern that changed in 2011 was that nole beat nadal at his own game ... even on HC, djoker didn't blow nadal off court, he grinded him down, outlasted him .... nole beating nadal on HC isn't a big surprise , but it was the pattern which he used that was a 'surprise'.

So let's not kid ourselves by saying , oh, nole used to beat him before on HC, its not a big deal if he does it in 2011 and later ...

After a tense 3 setter vs murray @ rome in 2011, he appeared as fresh as ever in the final and beat nadal in straights by grinding him down, not going for all out offense

I'm not saying this is 'proof' of nole doping , but things did change in 2011 & later and it was a significant change

[robbo1970]

I would like to think that neither are juicing.

These are both very young guys still, that have really just hit their physical peak in terms of strength and muscle development.

The modern game is clearly very physical now and I think Nadal set the bar with being heavily muscled and perhaps at a new level of fitness. They have both had to get to a similar shape to compete. I think as well with Murray, to me he just looks as if he has developed from boy to man. Its actually quite common when men hit 24/25 that their muscle development changes.

Tight clothing does play a part too.

[zagor]

Originally Posted by abmk

Before 2011, h2h was 16-7 in favour of nadal

all 7 of djokovic's wins were on HC and *all* were in *straights* ... he won all those by blowing nadal off court

nadal outlasted him every other time, including on HC ....

the pattern that changed in 2011 was that nole beat nadal at his own game ... even on HC, djoker didn't blow nadal off court, he grinded him down, outlasted him .... nole beating nadal on HC isn't a big surprise , but it was the pattern which he used that was a 'surprise'.

So let's not kid ourselves by saying , oh, nole used to beat him before on HC, its not a big deal if he does it in 2011 and later ...

After a tense 3 setter vs murray @ rome in 2011, he appeared as fresh as ever in the final and beat nadal in straights by grinding him down, not going for all out offense

I'm not saying this is 'proof' of nole doping , but things did change in 2011 & later and it was a significant change

Nadal did get Novak in matches that went to the distance before 2011 but how many of those wins were due to Nadal outlasting him instead of just being mentally tougher? Remember their brutal 2009 Madrid SF? Novak had 3 MPs but Nadal raised his level and saved them, he stepped it up a notch while Novak tightened up.

Also as I said before in this thread, while Nadal played overall great tennis on HC and grass in 2011 I'm not convinced his endurance was on the same level as before, IMO his time on tour coupled with his playing style took a toll on him in that regard.

[Fiji]

Murray is not doping. He was pooped and useless in the AO final, which is perfectly understandable after the 5 setter SF with Federer. Murray is human.

Cyborgs like Nadal at the 2009 AO and Djokovic at the 2012 AO are the ones to be suspicious of. Clearly PEDs were involved.