Nadal will win Wimbledon

N

NoBadMojo

G.O.A.T.
I believe Nadal will win W this year and not face Fed in the finals. Nadal made it to the finals last year and it took 4 sets for Fed to beat him and one of the sets Nadal lost I believe was a tiebreaker set. Obviously Nadal has momentum. The ball bounces higher and truer at W these days which better supports the low risk baseline grinding and Fed can do lots of UE's and such....look for some other grinder to take out Fed earlier on and for Nadal to win it all. I'll be rooting for Fed, but I think people know how to beat him more now and he does too many UE's, misshits, frame balls etc which he can no longer get away with. The way to beat him is to make him hit a ton of balls....low risk tennis is the name of the game unfortunately these days.......
Nadal in the FO Final.....28UE's with 1/2 of them being in the first set.
Fed with 60 UE's and countless misshits and frameballs allowing Nadal to gain control of the points or hit outright winners. This on a perfect day for tennis with hardly any wind and I believe the Center Court at the FO to be in a pristine sort of condition..i realize Nadal directed lots of high bounders to the Fed backhand at the FO
 
ACE of Hearts

ACE of Hearts

Bionic Poster
Grass is still grass and the ball still stays low.We will see how the grass plays out in the beginning.Federer takes wimbledon very serious, if he loses, it will be because someone was in the zone like Krajicek and i dont know if anyone can do that.
 
r2473

r2473

G.O.A.T.
Fed is washed up. I heard that the local baker bageled him today. I doubt if he ever wins another set. Borg was encouraging him to retire (too old already).
 
drakulie

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
NoBadMojo said:
I think people know how to beat him more now and he does too many UE's, misshits, frame balls etc which he can no longer get away with.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. He was getting away with this before, but now he is not???

NoBadMojo said:
Nadal in the FO Final.....28UE's with 1/2 of them being in the first set.
Fed with 60 UE's and countless misshits and frameballs allowing Nadal to gain control of the points or hit outright winners.
Click to expand...

How do you account for the fact that Fed hit more winners than Nadal? Does that mean Nadal had MORE "mishits" and "framed balls" than Fed allowing him to take over the point and hit outright winners?


Anyway, I agree Nadal will get to the finals for a second straight year, and Fed may be due for an upset.
 
federerfanatic

federerfanatic

Banned
Nadal will definitely lose in the quarters of Wimbledon or sooner this year. You can quote me on that. Federer will win Wimbledon dropping no more then 1 set again.
 
edberg505

edberg505

Legend
NoBadMojo said:
ya think eh? wasnt so at the last couple W's.



nice contribution..why dont you post a list of things you allow people to discuss?
Click to expand...

Hey, I don't have a problem with you discussing it. It's just that a thread identical to this one was put up yesterday.
 
F

FiveO

Hall of Fame
ACE of Hearts said:
Grass is still grass and the ball still stays low.We will see how the grass plays out in the beginning.Federer takes wimbledon very serious, if he loses, it will be because someone was in the zone like Krajicek and i dont know if anyone can do that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, uh no, not when groundies, not just those from Nadal, are bouncing up to chest height which was what has been happening for the past couple of years.

When grass was grass, taking a lob off the bounce a player had doubts that the bounce would be high enough to hit an overhead off of.

It isn't just the grass change to rye. Whether it was by design, or whether in quest the "more uniform" playing surface by rolling it, combined with any dry spell the ground under that grass is more clay-like in its firmness. IOW its now nearly as hard as concrete under that thin layer of green. Result=much higher bounces than ever.
 
B

BigServer1

Legend
NoBadMojo said:
ya think eh? wasnt so at the last couple W's.
Click to expand...

That's true, but who won those last couple Wimbledons? As for last years final, Rafa got bageled in the first set, and Roger served for the 4th at 5-1, but got broken and won 6-3. There were two close sets in the middle, but it was bookended by absolute dominance.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
FiveO said:
Yeah, uh no, not when groundies, not just those from Nadal, are bouncing up to chest height which was what has been happening for the past couple of years.

When grass was grass, taking a lob off the bounce a player had doubts that the bounce would be high enough to hit an overhead off of.

It isn't just the grass change to rye. Whether it was by design, or whether in quest the "more uniform" playing surface by rolling it, combined with any dry spell the ground under that grass is more clay-like in its firmness. IOW its now nearly as hard as concrete under that thin layer of green. Result=much higher bounces than ever.
Click to expand...

I've played at Mission Hills (Roddick said it was as good as any grass court in the world, they played Davis Cup there) and there is no way the bouncing was nearly as high as ANY hard court and the feel of the ground was extremely plush compared to hard court. We played for four hours and could have kept going. Felt fresh as a daisy when we were done.

I'm not saying they are exactly the same as wimbledon's conditions obviously but grass IS still grass.
 
drakulie

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
BigServer1 said:
That's true, but who won those last couple Wimbledons? As for last years final, Rafa got bageled in the first set, and Roger served for the 4th at 5-1, but got broken and won 6-3. There were two close sets in the middle, but it was bookended by absolute dominance.
Click to expand...

^^^ yeah, he must have been "mishitting and shanking" alot in that final to dominate two sets like that. According to the OP he was "gettting away with it" before. :roll:
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
BigServer1 said:
That's true, but who won those last couple Wimbledons? As for last years final, Rafa got bageled in the first set, and Roger served for the 4th at 5-1, but got broken and won 6-3. There were two close sets in the middle, but it was bookended by absolute dominance.
Click to expand...

Nadal should have won the second set. He choked that one away. Assume he comes out not nearly as nervous. What then? Federer is obviously the huge favorite but Nadal is not incapable.
 
federerfanatic

federerfanatic

Banned
Federer played his worst tennis, his worst ever match with Nadal including all their clay court matches too, in last years Wimbledon final and still easily beat Nadal playing his best. If Nadal cant beat Federer playing like that he never will on grass.
 
N

Noveson

Hall of Fame
federerfanatic said:
Federer played his worst tennis, his worst ever match with Nadal including all their clay court matches too, in last years Wimbledon final and still easily beat Nadal playing his best. If Nadal cant beat Federer playing like that he never will on grass.
Click to expand...

:lol: So he was playing worse on his favorite surface, than when he got killed on his worst surface? I don't think so.
 
federerfanatic

federerfanatic

Banned
BigServer1 said:
That's true, but who won those last couple Wimbledons? As for last years final, Rafa got bageled in the first set, and Roger served for the 4th at 5-1, but got broken and won 6-3. There were two close sets in the middle, but it was bookended by absolute dominance.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Roger played his 2nd crappiest match of the last 2 years, only behind his match with Murray in Cincinnati, and still dominated the match basically. There was more pressure on him then any match since Nadal being in the Wimbledon final was such a shock to begin with, and a loss to Nadal at Wimbledon would have been an embarassment at that point. So it explains his horrendous performance. If they played again on grass it would be much more lopsided, although it is extremely unlikely they would ever play on grass again.
 
federerfanatic

federerfanatic

Banned
Noveson said:
:lol: So he was playing worse on his favorite surface, than when he got killed on his worst surface? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Yes absolutely. Federer can play pretty well and still maybe lose to Nadal on clay. Federer playing half decent would never lose even a set to Nadal on grass, no matter how Nadal played.
 
N

NoBadMojo

G.O.A.T.
FiveO said:
Yeah, uh no, not when groundies, not just those from Nadal, are bouncing up to chest height which was what has been happening for the past couple of years.

When grass was grass, taking a lob off the bounce a player had doubts that the bounce would be high enough to hit an overhead off of.

It isn't just the grass change to rye. Whether it was by design, or whether in quest the "more uniform" playing surface by rolling it, combined with any dry spell the ground under that grass is more clay-like in its firmness. IOW its now nearly as hard as concrete under that thin layer of green. Result=much higher bounces than ever.
Click to expand...


Exactly, and this goes back even farther than the last couple of years, and I think started when the Spaniards threatened to boycott W because Wimbledon didnt seed exactly according to the rankings (Translation: The Spaniards didnt know how to play on grass). so now the ball bounces much higher and uniformly than it used to.

I think this has been very bad for tennis, when the most prestigious tennis event now discourages all court play by setting up the surface so the western grippers can way more easily get under the ball to produce more of the same ole' stuff.
 
B

BigServer1

Legend
TennisandMusic said:
Nadal should have won the second set. He choked that one away. Assume he comes out not nearly as nervous. What then? Federer is obviously the huge favorite but Nadal is not incapable.
Click to expand...

Should have and did are two different things. Roger raised his level in that tiebreak when he had to. Roger should have converted match points in Rome 2006 and he should have converted more than 1 out of 17 BPs yesterday, but he didn't. Rafa raised his level when it mattered most, and if you credit Nadal for doing so at RG, you should credit Federer for doing so at Wimbly. Choking is a two way street, and usually a choke is the result of on guy raising his level. I never said that Nadal was incapable, and his play at last years Wimbly proved his ability to adapt. That doesn't change the fact that Fed won in 4 sets, one of which was a bagel, and another that wasn't that close (Fed served for the breadstick, but ended up winning it 6-3).
 
hoosierbr

hoosierbr

Hall of Fame
The AELTC, in one stroke (pardon the pun), has made it impossible for a Brit to win Wimbledon for the forseeable future by giving into the complaints that clay courters don't have a fair chance at Wimbledon. As if there aren't enough clay tournaments during the year as it is. Lest we forget Bjorn Borg wasn't exactly a grass specialist yet he managed to do just fine at SW19 because he put in the hard work and dedicated himself to learning how to play on grass at a time when the grass at Wimbledon was much quicker and, some have said, the clay at Roland Garros was slower.

BTW, Murray doesn't count. He's Scottish, remember?;)

As for Nadal winning Wimbledon I can't see it happening yet. Last year he got to the final on pure adrenalin. He should have lost in the second round like he did the year before. His second round match could be interesting. However, I've always said that like Sampras I think Fed will fail to match the 5 year mark set by Borg. Think someone like a Karlovic, Guccione maybe a Sam Querrey could pull a Krajicek and take down Roger.

On a side note, I don't agree that Fed's mishits and framing of balls is the biggest reason he's been more vunerable this year. I think, to a certain extent, he's peaked and the other guys are getting closer to him and paying attention to how others have managed to beat him. Fed has always shanked a lot of balls but he's managed to do ok.
 
Last edited:
F

fastdunn

Legend
ACE of Hearts said:
Grass is still grass and the ball still stays low.
Click to expand...

"lower" than clay. Its bounce got "higher" lately though.

One common factor with clay, though, is that it is an organic bounce.

And by the end of 2nd week, baseline area loses lots of grasses and kinda
become like clay.... and .... everybody plays on the balded red area of the baseline...
 
T

Tennis_Monk

Hall of Fame
Nadal wont cut it this year. However i see some tough challenges for Federer. Given his mental state right now, someone could pick him up in early stages. Once he gets to 2 week, forget it. He will defend his championship.
 
AAAA

AAAA

Hall of Fame
Wimbledon did the right thing by slowing the grass courts down. People were bored stiff by the servefests of the 90s on fast grass and fast indoor courts. Blaming the clay courters is a whine.
 
F

FiveO

Hall of Fame
tricky said:
BTW, Wimbledon's using same surface as last year? So same bounce and speed and everything?
Click to expand...

Same surface. Weather will obviously be a contributing factor. Wetter weather things will be slightly lower and slightly quicker, drier and chest high groundies will be seen again.

AAAA said:
Wimbledon did the right thing by slowing the grass courts down. People were bored stiff by the servefests of the 90s on fast grass and fast indoor courts. Blaming the clay courters is a whine.
Click to expand...

The all-courters and serve and volleyers of the past never threatened to boycott RG....EVER. The whine is one-sided and with a decidedly non-English speaking accent. Make every surface the same medium-medium fast speed no matter their construction or historical demands and watch everyone play identically no matter the venue. Lab rats playing tennis on the same oversized ping-pong table. Or even better 64 first round encounters between Eddie Dibbs and Harold Solomon on steroids. Yeah, can't you just smell the excitement? Boredom is rarely the result of diversity and contrast it is the result of sameness and homogenization, one need look no further than the WTA save for Henin. Be careful what you wish for.
 
F

fastdunn

Legend
I'm all for Wimbledon's slowing down their surfaces.

I just think they did it a bit too much.

Maybe 2001 grass was slow enough.

Watching everyone switching from S&V to baseliner from 2003
was a bit too much for me.

I think ATP will try to maintain current condition (tour in general)for a while.
Look what happens now. Great rivarly between Federer and Nadal.
More seedings and more familar players on quarter finals or higher.

This has been successful strateggy from ATP and they will maintain
it for while, IMHO.

However, when people get bored with baseline play, I think they
might change it back a little.
 
AAAA

AAAA

Hall of Fame
FiveO said:
The all-courters and serve and volleyers of the past never threatened to boycott RG....EVER. The whine is one-sided and with a decidedly non-English speaking accent. Make every surface the same medium-medium fast speed no matter their construction or historical demands and watch everyone play identically no matter the venue. Lab rats playing tennis on the same oversized ping-pong table. Or even better 64 first round encounters between Eddie Dibbs and Harold Solomon on steroids. Yeah, can't you just smell the excitement? Boredom is rarely the result of diversity and contrast it is the result of sameness and homogenization, one need look no further than the WTA save for Henin. Be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's a whine and it's a whine on this message board far more than the actual players were willing to state publicly at the time the changes were made. It's creative history reporting to say a bunch of clay courters forced the AELTC to change the courts just for them. The change was due far more to the way public perception was influenced by the newspapers in England.

On the fast grass courts of the 90s when Sampras and the other big s&v'ers in their prime faced a baseliner there was never any tough calls in my mind about the outcome. Apart from the anomaly of Agassi's lone title, a baseliner was at an inherent and often predictable match losing disadvantage against the top s&v players of the era.

Edit: corrected spelling error
 
Last edited:
AAAA

AAAA

Hall of Fame
fastdunn said:
I'm all for Wimbledon's slowing down their surfaces.

I just think they did it a bit too much.

Maybe 2001 grass was slow enough.
Click to expand...

fastdunn, this must be the first post of yours that I agree with. Given the choice between too fast or too slow I'd pick too slow. It's extremely difficult to get the speed 'right' for any period of time because the variables the players are not always the same and will change more and more as the years go by.
 
hoosierbr

hoosierbr

Hall of Fame
AAAA said:
On the fast grass courts of the 90s when Sampras and the other big s&v'ers in their prime faced a baseliner there was never any tough calls in my mind about the outcome. Apart from the anomaly of Agassi's lone title, a baseliner was at an inherent and often predictable match losing disadvantage against the top s&v players of the era.
Click to expand...

The courts were just as fast and not as well kept in the 70's and 80's when Borg won his 5 titles. Don't recall many people calling him an anomaly.

There's no argument that the slowing down of the grass and indoor surfaces has been a huge blow to all-court and serve-and-volleyers making the sport very one-dimensional and a game of fitness, not skill. If that's a whine then just about everyone who knows tennis is a whiner. And if you think tennis better off because of it then fine.
 
N

NoBadMojo

G.O.A.T.
tennis_hand said:
another troll thread.
Click to expand...

you must be really proud of this contribution

AAAA said:
Like I said, it's a whine

On the fast grass courts of the 90s when Sampras and the other big s&v'ers in their prime faced a baseliner there was never any tough calls in my mind about the outcome. Apart from the anomly of Agassi's lone title, a baseliner was at an inherent and often predictable match losing disadvantage against the top s&v players of the era.
Click to expand...

right..that's what we're saying...the claycourters whined and threatened boycotting....> courts started bouncing higher..

as to the predictability of the old W, thats not a valid point compared to the predictability of a boring baseliner winning everywhere on tour now..talk about predictable! even fed, who is capable of playing all court style and serve/volley knows that he cant do it with any sort of regularity because of the conditons out there. now i would say he's actually a baseliner with skills. as for Sampras, maybe you dont undersand that he could play from the back court too and that some of us enjoy watching players hit all of the shots rather than some of the shots

excuse those of us wishing for some variety and something/anything other than brain numbing baseline exchanges where all the matches are the same except for the names of the players..maybe we enjoy watching two combatants with contrasting styles a la agassi/sampras etc rather than everyone with the same style. hey if people like their tennis boring, that's fine with me....they should quit whining about those of us who enjoy some variety in their tennis tho....
 
bagung

bagung

Hall of Fame
nadal is getting used to the grass now than before, so as federer towards clay.
the current tennis world belongs to both of them... we are going to see more finals starring fed vs nadal...
someone to upset fed in the big W before the final? i doubt it, as nobody plays better in grass than fed... last year, he beats everyone in straight sets till the final against nadal. if and only if, there is anyone can beat fed in grass, it must be nadal.
when nadal lost in hamburg, he said if there is somone to stop his clay winning streaks, it must be roger federer....
the two of them is in different league than the rest of atp players...
safin used to be one of the biggest opponent to fed, but now, he is doing poorly... blake, roddick, davydenko is "lunch" for federer. djokovic is good, but he is too proud, he can give nadal a problem, but his playing style will not give fed a problems......
 
ACE of Hearts

ACE of Hearts

Bionic Poster
I prefer them speeding up the courts.I wanna see serve and volley but there arent any out there.Fed could do it if he chose to practice it but he doesnt.
 
Shaolin

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Fed could go in either direction, get depressed or get motivated from last Sunday. Personally I think hes gonna come to Wimbledon with a pissed off and aggressive mentality, swinging like a dominatrix at a bachelor party. I feel bad for anyone that gets in his way over the fortnight.
 
mileslong

mileslong

Professional
nadal will not even make it to the finals, he got a draw from heaven last year and odds are it wont happen again, remember he came one hair from losing in the first round to a qualifier. he hasnt come close to winning any other major and he hasnt changed anything about his game really and there are even more young guns this year than last.
 
T

tennis_hand

Hall of Fame
mileslong said:
nadal will not even make it to the finals, he got a draw from heaven last year and odds are it wont happen again, remember he came one hair from losing in the first round to a qualifier. he hasnt come close to winning any other major and he hasnt changed anything about his game really and there are even more young guns this year than last.
Click to expand...

and met Agassi. :p
 
fednad

fednad

Hall of Fame
drakulie said:
Anyway, I agree Nadal will get to the finals for a second straight year, and Fed may be due for an upset.
Click to expand...

Drake, you really beliece so?
I mean both of them: First that Nadal will reach the Final and second that he will upset Fed there?
And if so, any reasons supporting your beliefs?
 
F

fastdunn

Legend
AAAA said:
fastdunn, this must be the first post of yours that I agree with. Given the choice between too fast or too slow I'd pick too slow. It's extremely difficult to get the speed 'right' for any period of time because the variables the players are not always the same and will change more and more as the years go by.
Click to expand...

That is true. But I don't think I've ever witnessed this much change
in short period of time during my following of the game for about 20 years.

I don't think I've ever witnessed this large % of players changing their
playing style even in their mid-late career.

I think it was a bit too much and too quick. But in retrospect, I should
say ATP's strategy has been proving successful. I feel like business is
getting better in tennis. Huge Federer-Nadal thing. More familiar players
on all tournaments. More approachable pro-tennis to general public.
It's a success in terms of business.
 
kimizz

kimizz

Rookie
Tomorrow is the first big challenge at grass for Nadal. Del Potro :eek: TBH even as a Nadal fan I dont see him winning...Those who saw the match between d-Potro and Johansson in the queens club knows what I mean. I think he lost like 2 points in hes serve in the first set!

Del Potro is the man to watch at Wimbledon(assmuming he doesnt get a draw like in FO) , I doubt he can reach beyond quarters since hes a young choker but definetly a potential top5 player in the future.
 
S

Scorch

Rookie
As far as I was aware there was actually very little serve volleying at Wimbledon in the 90s - it tended to just be serving!!

There were too many men's matches that did not provide much of a spectacle at all, too many aces and unreturnable serves. To the average viewer (who watched very little tennis outside of Wimbledon) tennis was becoming something of a joke.

I don't think for a second that Wimbledon's strategy was to appease clay courters - the courts are still not so slow that they give an out and out clay court baseliner a real advantage.

However I think that engineering the speed of a grass court is clearly a complex science and given the choice the AELTC would prefer the courts were slightly quicker.

p.s. Murray would surely benefit from the current speed of the courts and not a return to the ultra slick grass of the 90s.
 
AAAA

AAAA

Hall of Fame
hoosierbr said:
The courts were just as fast and not as well kept in the 70's and 80's when Borg won his 5 titles. Don't recall many people calling him an anomaly.
Click to expand...

borg s&v'ed at Wimbledon far more than Agassi ever did so his deliberate change to more s&v play supports what I said about baseline play being a losing disadvantage on the fast courts of the 90s and before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
i dislike nadal not because i love him less
Replies
21
Views
2K
Sentinel
Sentinel
S
Who's mentally tough? Fed or Nadal?
Replies
11
Views
847
tennisdude083
tennisdude083
D
Djokovic's competition in 2011-2015
2 3 4
Replies
175
Views
4K
Deleted member 779124
D
T
Who wins in a Nadal Vs. Fed Wimbledon final this year?
Replies
21
Views
1K
The Pusher Terminator
T
P
Let's HOPE NADAL is FIT for Wimbledon!!!!
Replies
1
Views
481
War Safin!
War Safin!
Top