Who is the biggest beneficiary of nadal absence from tour??

[MG1]

Who is the biggest beneficiary of nadal absence from tour??

Options are available in poll..you can share your own thoughts

[octogon]

Murray. If Nadal were still in the mix, I doubt he'd have a slam right now.

Either Nadal would beat him in the US open semi-final, or Murray would beat Nadal, but kill himself in the process, leaving him easy meat for Djokovic in the final. Or he'd face Nadal in the final and choke.

[The-Champ]

Originally Posted by octogon

Murray. If Nadal were still in the mix, I doubt he'd have a slam right now.

Either Nadal would beat him in the US open semi-final, or Murray would beat Nadal, but kill himself in the process, leaving him easy meat for Djokovic in the final. Or he'd face Nadal in the final and choke.

or it could have been like shanghai or Tokyo where Murray barely broke sweat in beating Nadal, therefore would have been an easier opponent than Berdych..

[kalyan4fedever]

haha i like ur fifth option all epic options

[Murrayfan31]

I would've picked the fans. But I didn't see that there.

[joeri888]

I guess Murray. At least if you don't count Wimbledon as Nadal's absence.

[Murrayfan31]

Originally Posted by joeri888

I guess Murray. At least if you don't count Wimbledon as Nadal's absence.

Lendl fit Murray would destroy Nadal.

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by Murrayfan31

Lendl fit Murray would destroy Nadal.

Might be, but not so sure he would everytime. In Nadal's absence, Murray went to win Olympics, USO and make the AO final.

Djokovic might have had some luck with it as well, since he ended up not being in Murray's half at the USO and the AO and played Delpo in the semis of the WTF.

[octogon]

Originally Posted by The-Champ

or it could have been like shanghai or Tokyo where Murray barely broke sweat in beating Nadal, therefore would have been an easier opponent than Berdych..

Get real. Tokyo and Shanghai are not the latter stages of a slam. Nadal in the semis of a slam is not going to get crushed by Murray. The only way Murray gets an easy victory is if Nadal is injured. Otherwise, it's a minimum of 4 sets, probably 5.

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by joeri888

Might be, but not so sure he would everytime. In Nadal's absence, Murray went to win Olympics, USO and make the AO final.

Djokovic might have had some luck with it as well, since he ended up not being in Murray's half at the USO and the AO and played Delpo in the semis of the WTF.

Murray beat Fed to get the the 2013 AO final, so Nadal's absence has little to do with that. Unless you wanted Murray to go through Nadal in the QF, then Fed in the SF, then Djokovic in the F?

The guy getting Ferrer instead of Nadal in the semi's has also benefited hugely (as a Ferrer SF is basically a bye to the final) and this has been Djokovic on the 2 slams Nadal has absent from.

[kishnabe]

Nadal Knees....Murray reaches Wimbledon final.

Nadal Absence.....Murray wins OG Singles, US Open and reaches Aussie final.....lucky but deserved.

[cc0509]

Most definitely David Ferrer.

[Alchemy-Z]

Murray

and then Vina Del Mar ...they are probably racking in the dough from his appearance.

but whatever tournament he came back to was going to get big attention...so I am kinda Happy he chose a lesser known tournament to boost

[Chanwan]

Originally Posted by octogon

Get real. Tokyo and Shanghai are not the latter stages of a slam. Nadal in the semis of a slam is not going to get crushed by Murray. The only way Murray gets an easy victory is if Nadal is injured. Otherwise, it's a minimum of 4 sets, probably 5.

Need I mention US 2008 and AO 2010? (and no, I don't buy that Nadal's injury was bad enough to cause him to lose - he was flat out beaten and chose to withdrew. It worked, he kept Murray as a lapdog for a little longer)

[octogon]

Originally Posted by Chanwan

Need I mention US 2008 and AO 2010? (and no, I don't buy that Nadal's injury was bad enough to cause him to lose - he was flat out beaten and chose to withdrew. It worked, he kept Murray as a lapdog for a little longer)

US Open 2008 was a tough 4 setter (and I said it'd be a minimum of 4 sets), and, and you can be as skeptical as you like about Nadal's injury in the AO 2010, but the fact is, it goes down as a loss due to retirement because of injury. Nadal is a champion. He generally takes his beatings like a man. If he can't continue, then he's injured.

So you've got no point. A fully fit Nadal would either beat Muzza in the US Open semi, or take him to 4 or 5 tough sets in a loss.

[*Sparkle*]

The sensible answer is either Djokovic or Ferrer.

Ferrer obviously has had the advantage of being seeded #4, giving him a great chance of getting to the semis, and boosting his ranking points.

In theory, Djokovic and Federer should have equal advantage, as one of them has been getting a theoretically clear run to the finals, so fresher for the final, plus more points assured - except only really Djokovic has taken full advantage of that.

All players who may have faced Nadal will probably have faced an easier competitor instead, and Murray was more likely to meet Nadal than most players, but he still had to (theoretically) go through Federer and Djokovic to win a title, which isn't much different to what he had to do when Nadal was around.

[mariecon]

Originally Posted by octogon

Murray. If Nadal were still in the mix, I doubt he'd have a slam right now.

Either Nadal would beat him in the US open semi-final, or Murray would beat Nadal, but kill himself in the process, leaving him easy meat for Djokovic in the final. Or he'd face Nadal in the final and choke.

this!

[vive le beau jeu !]

to make it simple: tennis.

[batz]

Originally Posted by octogon

Murray. If Nadal were still in the mix, I doubt he'd have a slam right now.

Either Nadal would beat him in the US open semi-final, or Murray would beat Nadal, but kill himself in the process, leaving him easy meat for Djokovic in the final. Or he'd face Nadal in the final and choke.

Yep - that's definitely what would happen. Or maybe Nadal would lose to Rosol?

I guess we'll never know with any certainty what would have happened.

The only facts we have to go on are that Murray hasn't choked in the last 4 big finals he's played in and that Nadal and Murray are 2:2 in hardcourt slams.

[bluetrain4]

Originally Posted by cc0509

Most definitely David Ferrer.

I'd agree, generally. He now gets his own quarter of the draw and can avoid playing Fed, Murray, or Djoker until the SFs - basically he has a much, much better chance at making Slam SFs, which he promptly took advantage of at the USO and AO (with thanks to Almagro).