The Safinator
Rookie
Do you think all the injuries went his way? He works hard, is a great in-match problem solver, works at his game even when he's at the top, and fights harder than everyone else. Things will always go well for people like that.
How can everything always goes Nadal's way?
- Thread starter Omega_7000
- Start date
Drob
Hall of Fame
Nadal's draw through the semis was no cakewalk. Excellent players. But he got through w loss of one set. Medvedev proved to be a tough opponent - a fifth seed who appears to have the mental strength of a champion. Legit Slam title for Nadal, beyond question.
Other side of coin - don't assume even the short-term future. Don't think Medvedev is going fall off, think he is here to stay. It also looked like he had figured out a way to play Nadal during the course of the match. Thiem is very, very close, and I think very likely to finally take the Musketeer's Cup off of Rafa's hands. Tsitsipas simply played way too many matches the first half of the season for his young body. He will revive and is a danger to anyone. Zverev will also come back. At some point he will stop pouting and go about being a tennis player. As soon as he does that, I think we will start seeing him fulfill his potential. Presumably, del Potro returns and is healthy. The young guys mentioned are also going to be a year more mature and physically stronger.
So, for 2020 I think you have a more open-ended situation than in past years. Really this hypothetical (but likely) top eight could all be very close: Nole, Rafa, Mdv, Zverev, Thiem, Federer, Delpo, Tsitsipas. Then there are some interesting wild cards who could beat Nadal or Djokovic on any given day, including at a Slam: Auger Aliassime, Khachanov, possibly Rublev or Shapovalov, and, of course, Kyrgios.
Another scenario is that Djokovic is motivated to put it into yet a higher gear, and cleans up next year. I personally don't think this is will happen, given the competition, and given the mileage on Novak.
Splendid work by Rafa; Slam earned. I tend to think it may also be his last.
Other side of coin - don't assume even the short-term future. Don't think Medvedev is going fall off, think he is here to stay. It also looked like he had figured out a way to play Nadal during the course of the match. Thiem is very, very close, and I think very likely to finally take the Musketeer's Cup off of Rafa's hands. Tsitsipas simply played way too many matches the first half of the season for his young body. He will revive and is a danger to anyone. Zverev will also come back. At some point he will stop pouting and go about being a tennis player. As soon as he does that, I think we will start seeing him fulfill his potential. Presumably, del Potro returns and is healthy. The young guys mentioned are also going to be a year more mature and physically stronger.
So, for 2020 I think you have a more open-ended situation than in past years. Really this hypothetical (but likely) top eight could all be very close: Nole, Rafa, Mdv, Zverev, Thiem, Federer, Delpo, Tsitsipas. Then there are some interesting wild cards who could beat Nadal or Djokovic on any given day, including at a Slam: Auger Aliassime, Khachanov, possibly Rublev or Shapovalov, and, of course, Kyrgios.
Another scenario is that Djokovic is motivated to put it into yet a higher gear, and cleans up next year. I personally don't think this is will happen, given the competition, and given the mileage on Novak.
Splendid work by Rafa; Slam earned. I tend to think it may also be his last.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
That ******* should be banned as soon as possible.
It seems the moderators of this site are not impartial, unfortunately!
Subway Tennis
Legend
This is a myth belonging in the same line of thought with Federer's backhand belonging in an art museum.
Nadal's talent is overlooked the same way Federer's ability to fight is not given enough credit.
Overall Nadal and Djokovic have been pretty lucky. Fed has been very unfortunate.
He had to change racket because he used to use a 90 square inch head that required elite precision.
Djokodal are basically playing 90% the same game they did 7-8 years ago. Big margins, keep the ball in play with controlled aggression. Fed’s style is much harder to pull off.
Subway Tennis
Legend
Disagree with this. Federer has proven that he is capable of sustaining an extremely high level for 4-5 hours at a time. In matches he lost, he lost to the better player, not because his game is harder to win with.
Even if it were the case that his game was more fragile, there are no bonus points for possessing a playing style that is more prone to breaking down.
Lol no.
Luck is playing the same style age 28-33 with next to 0 competition from next gen, hoovering up slams in one of the weakest eras in tennis history.
Fed would have done better had be been the same age. Peak for peak he doesn’t need weak opponents he’s that good. Especially at Wimbledon and USO
I thought Fed fought incredibly well Wimbledon 2019 final, deepest I’ve seen him dig in along with 2017 AO.
Just a cruel joke how it ended up. But still, the way he fought back after choking the first set and going a break down in the 5th. Showed way more balls and higher level than any of those 2015 finals when he folded like a house of cards.
Last edited:
liftordie
Hall of Fame
Tshooter
G.O.A.T.
Drob
Hall of Fame
That ******* should be banned as soon as possible.
It seems the moderators of this site are not impartial, unfortunately!
Should be banned for wishing a car wreck. I hope Jackdaw edits that out of the posts and acknowledges how wrong that is.
The PED discussion is fair game. But, please, facts firsts, reasonable inferences, "testimony" (random comments okay). Not just accusations unsupported.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
The Federism is a dangerous religion.
They believe in their Messiah, the almighty who must reign forever for ever and ever. When you contradict them and express a different opinion from what they believe, they turn against you or your beliefs. They don't care about the Truth, only what they think is Valid and the sect turns against you in unpleasant ways.
Religious extremism only leads to the desolation of the soul.
Drob
Hall of Fame
My understanding was that by "bigger racquet" is meant he had moved up to the size everybody else was playing with, not that he was playing with a larger racquet than anyone else. In fact, I think I have seen chart on the dimensions and so forth of the racquets of many leading players and Federer's was still a little smaller than some others
The situation was like Connors, Lendl and Sampras. Federer had refused to change his long-time racquet, which was small compared to his competitors.
I don't think "larger racquet" has anything to do with any argument about the relative merits of each of the "Big Three." It is not "larger" except in comparison with an outdated, smaller racquet. Sampras' has commented that he wished he had not been so stubborn, and had made a racquet change.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
He deserves a bit of luck, no?
Federer had plenty of luck with pigeons in Weak Era, no?
Now time for other GOATS to be a little lucky with de draws, no?
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I thought it was Djokovic who had the gluten allergy?
Drob
Hall of Fame
This G.O.A.T. business should be fun, not cause for seriousness or even rencor. Nobody should actually think a G.O.A.T. can be determined. There will always be disagreement. In the case of the "Big Three" we have to wait until each has completed his career. What if Federer wins Wimbledon next year? It is certainly a possibility, notwithstanding we seem to being seeing a decline.
What if Djokovic wins a second French Open? Suddenly he joins amateur Emerson, and Rocket as the only players to win each Slam twice.* He would also underscore his very impressive clay-court resume, for which he has not been given enough credit.
What if my hunch that USO was his last Slam is wrong, and Rafa manages to win another French and something else? Or maybe he wins the Aussie and he becomes the guy with 2 titles at each Slam. A few more M1000s on hard courts to go along w that, and then what to say about Rafa, compared to his rivals?
It is so up in the air. Moreover, there are some of us who would include a few more players in the discussion, going back into tennis history.
It is fine to use G.O.A.T. for fun, and even as a reference. But words are only signposts to meaning, anyway. And G.O.A.T. in particular is a word devoid of content.
* Traditional Slams
What if Djokovic wins a second French Open? Suddenly he joins amateur Emerson, and Rocket as the only players to win each Slam twice.* He would also underscore his very impressive clay-court resume, for which he has not been given enough credit.
What if my hunch that USO was his last Slam is wrong, and Rafa manages to win another French and something else? Or maybe he wins the Aussie and he becomes the guy with 2 titles at each Slam. A few more M1000s on hard courts to go along w that, and then what to say about Rafa, compared to his rivals?
It is so up in the air. Moreover, there are some of us who would include a few more players in the discussion, going back into tennis history.
It is fine to use G.O.A.T. for fun, and even as a reference. But words are only signposts to meaning, anyway. And G.O.A.T. in particular is a word devoid of content.
* Traditional Slams
Last edited:
Rafa24
Hall of Fame
because the mods are pro fed.
Rafa24
Hall of Fame
fed piled slams in a weak era before djoker and rafa came up.
Djokovic piled up slams in the weak era once Fed dropped off a cliff.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
The arc of the universe bends towards justice. Bull has been cruelly cheated out of his rightful titles so many times (at least in the a-moral world of the sense - he is of course unbeaten morally) that it is inevitable that he will start catching some breaks eventually. I'm a bit confused that you think this has already happened, however. Yesterday, Bull was extremely unlucky that both the umpire and his opponent tried to cheat him, and almost succeeded in doing so. Only idiotic beancounters would think that some arbitrary rule about how long you're allowed is more important than letting the players prepare properly for the next point. And only a cheat would repeatedly try to serve when his opponent isn't ready. Moreover, this comes at the end of yet another tournament where the organizers do everything possible to prevent Bull's inevitable victory - even going so far as to make them play on a court that's basically an ice rink and so is extremely fast and rather dangerous. Did you not notice how many players had to withdraw with injuries? Only Bull's unbelievable indefatigability enabled him not to join that list, bearing in mind his status as an injured Bull who plays tennis. And the fact that even a one-dimensional grinder like Medvedev had to charge the net should reveal how fast the court was. Fortunately, Bull's tactical versatility came to his rescue yet again, and he was able to adapt by spinning in some moon balls to pose Medvedev a challenge that he couldn't overcome.
duaneeo
Legend
Rafa "came up" in 2005...winning a slam, 4 Masters (two HC, one a BO5 final), 11 overall titles, and the YE#2.
I've never understood why Rafa fans want to more associate him with the 2010s (an era so weak that no one born in the 1990s was capable of winning a slam) rather than the more competitive era of the 2000s.
VoodooChild24
Semi-Pro
Luck is preparation meets opportunities. He pretty much said yesterday when he felt that the momentum turned against him that if he only “resist” he will have opportunities again.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Disagreed. Nadal has changed his style and tactics more than Federer.
Nadal shortens points, attacks at the net, hits more dropshots, hits bigger on the serve, etc. He can't play the same style he did 10 years ago when he could run forever. He gets more winded now. Expected of a player in their 30s.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
If Nadal didn't exist, most people on this forum wouldn't care about tennis. And nobody would really want to see Federer win 37 Slams without having any rivalries. Legacies are built from rivalries. That's why this era of Federer/Nadal/Djokovic is so incredible. 3 legendary players all playing at the same time. It's very rare. The outlier was Andy Murray who was half a level below the big 3 but was a huge competitor in managing to make so many Slam finals and winning 3 of them. This type of era and this level of domination may never happen again in tennis.
It's a comparison between the three.
Of course, all three are super talented and all three are fierce fighters. Nonetheless, there are degrees of separation among them.
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
This is getting ugly
alexio
G.O.A.T.
and they say h2h irrelevant
Purplemonster
Hall of Fame
Didn’t it go Federer’s way at the 2009 French Open ?? If it hadn’t Federer would not be in the GOAT debate.
duaneeo
Legend
No such thing. Federer and Djokovic never consistently won slams during the same period. Murray and Wawrinka were more relevant to Djokovic's era (2011 - 2016) than Federer. Cilic was almost as relevant as Roger during that period.
Federer/Nadal/Djokovic have won all the slams since 2017, but it's not their era. Even Nole is now past-generation. But the sorry state of players who actually are of this era (Nishikori/Dimitrov/Raonic/Thiem/Goffin/Tomic/Kyrgios/Sock/Busta/etc) are lost as ever, and those of the next era (Medvedev/Zverev/Tsitsipas/Khachanov/Shapovalov/Rublev) just can't seem to breakout and win a major.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
It's Federer's fault that he choked against Lost Gen Dimitrov. He could have met Nadal in the finals. I guess he's "unlucky " then.
AceSalvo
Legend
It's Federer's fault that he choked against Lost Gen Dimitrov. He could have met Nadal in the finals. I guess he's "unlucky " then.
Lost Gen Dimitrov who was virtually out of the tour for 8 months and got a walkover by another mighty Next Gen of the name “Coric” while Fed went SF in 2 slams.
