Federer "gamesmanship" and Nadal gamesmanship+cheating were not the same.

TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
P_Agony said:
What Federer said about Nadal's game once upon a time was dirty, and its a valid point to bash Federer over. However, this has nothing to do with the topic, which is labled "cheating". You have every right to think Fed cheated against Davy (I disagree), but if you think he cheated and at the same time you think Nadal's tactics yesterday were clean - that I cannot understand. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

I've called no one a cheater anywhere in my posts. I don't do that.

I likened the two incidences as examples. I think it's totally plausible for Nadal to take an injury timeout considering his injuries.

I remember the bathroom incident, but wasn't posting at the time. When I go and look back during that period I see two threads about the bathroom incidents, and the same morally outraged posters who decry Nadal as a cheat, laughing Fed's antics off.

I'm not the one trying to have it both ways. Far from it.
 
R

Rippy

Hall of Fame
TheTruth said:
Amazing, and they still don't see how they come off. Roger actually admitted it, but somehow they twist it into something else.

I guess he would have to pan to the camera and say, "To my fans at TW, I really did cheat. Seriously." Lol!
Click to expand...

Federer did not admit to using gamesmanship. Read what he actually said, not what you think he "really meant" by his comments.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
When Fed is losing, if Fed isn't taking bathroom breaks, he is always trying to find something stupid to intimidate the umpire with like his displeasure of the challenge system or whining about his opponent grunting(Bozo match), etc. When Nadal is losing he just focuses on the ball and just gets on with competing versus his opponent and doesn't try to intimidate or influence the umpire in stupid ways like Fed does.
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
dmt said:
yes we know toni should shut up and nadal even told his team to shut up? What more should he do, beat up his team or something?

And why didnt rafa fake injuries vs federer in 2007 masters cup, vs Tsonga in aussie open 08, or vs del potro at us open 09? Or at last years end of year championships when he lost every match?
Click to expand...
Because Nadal was blown off of the court so quickly in all of those matches that by the time the trainer made it out to the court, the match was already over.
 
C

catspaw

Rookie
TheTruth said:
....... And there was also the one match where he stopped the momentum to get his feet taped, and on the next change of end stopped the match to get the tape taken off. You remember that?
Click to expand...

vllaznia said:
Which match was that?
Click to expand...

IW 07 against Canas. Whether it was gamesmanship/cheating or whether he had blisters on his feet as he said, he went on to lose in straights - 7-5 6-2, I think.
 
C

catspaw

Rookie
samboy01 said:
Amount of slams Federer has won without his opponents choking: ZERO.
Click to expand...

casual_fan said:
Nadal is a choker now? I thought he was a warrior. Which one is it..a choking warrior?:)
Click to expand...

Bud said:
There are 7 rounds in each GS tournament :oops:

He didn't say finals
Click to expand...

Illogical. If Nadal or anyone else didn't choke in the finals, then he won those slams without his opponents choking whatever may have happened in earlier rounds.
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
TheNatural said:
When Fed is losing, if Fed isn't taking bathroom breaks, he is always trying to find something stupid to intimidate the umpire with like his displeasure of the challenge system or whining about his opponent grunting(Bozo match), etc. When Nadal is losing he just focuses on the ball and just gets on with competing versus his opponent and doesn't try to intimidate or influence the umpire in stupid ways like Fed does.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

He does it all the time, but people don't seem to see it, or it's different when he does it, LOL!
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
catspaw said:
IW 07 against Canas. Whether it was gamesmanship/cheating or whether he had blisters on his feet as he said, he went on to lose in straights - 7-5 6-2, I think.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

I'm not calling anyone a cheater. I'm just saying I've seen plenty of questionable tactics from Fed for people to be running around here calling Nadal a cheat and ignoring everything Fed does. It's just the double standards that are so irritating.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
catspaw said:
Illogical. If Nadal or anyone else didn't choke in the finals, then he won those slams without his opponents choking whatever may have happened in earlier rounds.
Click to expand...

Come on use your brain. Amazing I have to explain this again...

If his opponent in round 1 chokes the match away (i.e. Falla) and Federer wins that round and then the tournament then he didn't win the tournament without an opponent choking.

catspaw said:
IW 07 against Canas. Whether it was gamesmanship/cheating or whether he had blisters on his feet as he said, he went on to lose in straights - 7-5 6-2, I think.
Click to expand...

So, according to your statement, gamesmanship is OK as long as you lose... and you have the nerve to call others illogical? :lol:

The hypocrisy in this forum by fedfanatics™ is simply unbelievable... and the hypocrites don't even understand why they are hypocrites.
 
Last edited:
C

catspaw

Rookie
catspaw said:
Illogical. If Nadal or anyone else didn't choke in the finals, then he won those slams without his opponents choking whatever may have happened in earlier rounds.
Click to expand...

Bud said:
Come on use your brain. Amazing I have to explain this again...

If his opponent in round 1 chokes the match away (i.e. Falla) and Federer wins that round and then the tournament then he didn't win the tournament without an opponent choking.
Click to expand...

I AM using my brain, thank you. Are you using yours? If a player wins a final without the opponent choking, all previous chokes are frankly irrelevant. Perhaps you should be a little more precise with your wording. And, if Fed has never won a slam without an opponent choking somewhere along the line, surely that also applies to just about anyone who's won a slam (I grant you that players don't really get the chance to choke against Nadal at RG). So, if Nadal goes on to win Wimbledon this year, would it be fair to say that he only won because at least one opponent choked (let's use Petzchner as an example, shall we, especially as Nadal did absolutely nothing to unsettle him?)?

catspaw said:
IW 07 against Canas. Whether it was gamesmanship/cheating or whether he had blisters on his feet as he said, he went on to lose in straights - 7-5 6-2, I think.
Click to expand...


So, according to your statement, gamesmanship is OK as long as you lose... and you have the nerve to call others illogical? :lol:
Click to expand...

How on earth did you draw that conclusion from my statement!!! Somebody asked a question. I answered it and added the circumstances surrounding the match, including what was conjectured at the time and the result. I was simply reporting facts. Where did I say gamesmanship's OK as long as you lose?? For what it's worth, I don't like gamesmanship full stop - from anybody - whatever the end result of the match. I think your own powers of logic are a bit suspect here.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
catspaw said:
I AM using my brain, thank you. Are you using yours? If a player wins a final without the opponent choking, all previous chokes are frankly irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Why are they irrelevant?

If an early round opponent didn't choke Federer would never have played the final.

Again, that was his point.
 
C

catspaw

Rookie
Bud said:
Why are they irrelevant?

If an early round opponent didn't choke Federer would never have played the final.

Again, that was his point.
Click to expand...

They're irrelevant for several reasons:

a) choking happens all the time; it's not something peculiar to Fed's matches so shouldn't be brought into the equation re: Fed - you could say it about just about anyone who's ever won a slam.

b) the word "choke" tends to be thrown at anyone who loses after being in a position to win. It's a very subjective judgement.

c) and probably most importantly, tennis is, more than anything, a mental game. Wasn't it Boris Becker who said that it's 90% mental and only 10% physical? It's part of the package and, if you can't stop yourself getting the yips, then you don't deserve to win, whoever you are and whomever you're playing.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
catspaw said:
They're irrelevant for several reasons:

a) choking happens all the time; it's not something peculiar to Fed's matches so shouldn't be brought into the equation re: Fed - you could say it about just about anyone who's ever won a slam.

b) the word "choke" tends to be thrown at anyone who loses after being in a position to win. It's a very subjective judgement.

c) and probably most importantly, tennis is, more than anything, a mental game. Wasn't it Boris Becker who said that it's 90% mental and only 10% physical? It's part of the package and, if you can't stop yourself getting the yips, then you don't deserve to win, whoever you are and whomever you're playing.
Click to expand...

Some valid points but a choke is a choke... and again that was his point ;-)
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Players choke. It is just something that exists, and won't be going away as long as the sport exists.

Both Federer and Nadal have won matches with players choking against them, but so have many other greats in the past. But that is part of the game.

He who has all his weapons by his side will always be in a good position to win, this includes the mind - the most powerful weapon of them all.
 
mandy01

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
TheNatural said:
When Fed is losing, if Fed isn't taking bathroom breaks, he is always trying to find something stupid to intimidate the umpire with like his displeasure of the challenge system or whining about his opponent grunting(Bozo match), etc. When Nadal is losing he just focuses on the ball and just gets on with competing versus his opponent and doesn't try to intimidate or influence the umpire in stupid ways like Fed does.
Click to expand...
LOOOOOOOOOOOL now Nadal fans are REALLY grasping at straws :lol:
 
mandy01

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
TheTruth said:
Yeah, I do, and imo, he did. He clearly said it, but the excuse around here is he was only kidding. That's rich.

.
Click to expand...
Anyone who follows Roger knows his interviews with Courier aren't serious.And this is further evidenced by the fact that Roger was already there on court when the the umpire called time.And AGAIN where exactly this lovely admission came,you have still not shown us..
 
Last edited:
C

catspaw

Rookie
Bud said:
Some valid points but a choke is a choke... and again that was his point ;-)
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I guess MY point is that the point originally made was a spurious and essentially red-herringy type one. I'm happy to agree a stalemate if you are?:)
 
R

Rippy

Hall of Fame
muzza123 said:
Come on Rippy, is there really a need to remind everybody of ViscaB's comedy value everytime you post? ;)
Click to expand...

That's the only time I did it lol. But fair enough, it shall be the last time. :)

EDIT: hold on, you've got the comment in your signature, that's even worse...
 
fedfan08

fedfan08

Professional
There's only been one match where Fed has taken a time out (MTO or otherwise) where he's won the match - 2008 AO against Tipsy. Every other match he lost. The 2005 AO SF against Safin - Fed said a few months later his feet were bothering him so bad (not sure if it was blisters or something else) that he wasn't sure he'd have been able to play the final if he won. And the match against Murray at 2008 TMC in between games Fed would sit next to the linespersons/ball kids because his back was bothering him so much. And I believe in that match he walked over to Murray and personally let him know he was taking an MTO for his back. Perhaps that was all gamesmanship, but if it was it didn't work.
 
pame

pame

Hall of Fame
fedfan08 said:
There's only been one match where Fed has taken a time out (MTO or otherwise) where he's won the match - 2008 AO against Tipsy. Every other match he lost. The 2005 AO SF against Safin - Fed said a few months later his feet were bothering him so bad (not sure if it was blisters or something else) that he wasn't sure he'd have been able to play the final if he won. And the match against Murray at 2008 TMC in between games Fed would sit next to the linespersons/ball kids because his back was bothering him so much. And I believe in that match he walked over to Murray and personally let him know he was taking an MTO for his back. Perhaps that was all gamesmanship, but if it was it didn't work.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, Fed was recovering from an ankle he sprained in practice but that was known for quite a while before... if it's the right time I'm thinking of
 
muzza123

muzza123

Banned
Rippy said:
That's the only time I did it lol. But fair enough, it shall be the last time. :)

EDIT: hold on, you've got the comment in your signature, that's even worse...
Click to expand...

Did I say it's a bad thing? It would be wrong to allow ViscaB's gem of a post to become forgotten! Spread the word I say!
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Bud said:
Why are they irrelevant?

If an early round opponent didn't choke Federer would never have played the final.

Again, that was his point.
Click to expand...
If that's the case then:

Number of Slams won by Nadal without his opponents choking: ZERO!

:)
 
BreakPoint

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
ViscaB said:
Rafa is like the German national team. He's a winner.
Click to expand...
The German team may have won, but they will forever be labeled as cheaters and no one will respect them and people will root against them in the next round.

So just like Nadal, they may have won the battle, but lost the war.
 
jackson vile

jackson vile

G.O.A.T.
TheTruth said:
Amazing, and they still don't see how they come off. Roger actually admitted it, but somehow they twist it into something else.

I guess he would have to pan to the camera and say, "To my fans at TW, I really did cheat. Seriously." Lol!
Click to expand...

He did say that, he said that his actions were intentional because he was about to lose his @$$ and could not handle it.

They want to make believe that Roger has done this type of cheating less, so he is some how better.

Earth to ****s, when you cheat you are a cheater period! And forever, you guys need to stop painting yourselfs in a corner.

Even if it is only once, there is no "oh well once is ok, but twice!" BS,



Further more, both players called injury time outs, making them equal cheaters.

They are all cheaters DEAL WITH IT!
 
fedfan08

fedfan08

Professional
pame said:
If I remember correctly, Fed was recovering from an ankle he sprained in practice but that was known for quite a while before... if it's the right time I'm thinking of
Click to expand...
That was 2005 TMC where he probably shouldn't have even played, but he did. And he almost beat Nalbandian.
 
M

Mun

Banned
Nadal was injured, Fed wansn't. Both stopped the game. So Fed is a cheater and Nadal isn't. Simple.
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
Hitman said:
Players choke. It is just something that exists, and won't be going away as long as the sport exists.

Both Federer and Nadal have won matches with players choking against them, but so have many other greats in the past. But that is part of the game.

He who has all his weapons by his side will always be in a good position to win, this includes the mind - the most powerful weapon of them all.
Click to expand...

This is a great post. It was a pleasure to read it :).
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
mandy01 said:
Anyone who follows Roger knows his interviews with Courier aren't serious.And this is further evidenced by the fact that Roger was already there on court when the the umpire called time.And AGAIN where exactly this lovely admission came,you have still not shown us..
Click to expand...

I've never heard of this, Roger's interviews with Courier aren't serious. I don't believe that. We only have what he said we can't analyze their motives. That's actually the problem with this whole accusatory thing. No one knows whether Rafa was hurt or not, yet many declare him a cheater. Ironically, Fed admits to gamesmanship, but he wasn't serious.

It was an interview after the match. More than one person saw it as it was telecast worldwide. Everyone knows he said it, if he hadn't you couldn't say he wasn't serious. You've actually proved he did say it, by saying he didn't mean it. So, why would I need more proof?
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
jackson vile said:
He did say that, he said that his actions were intentional because he was about to lose his @$$ and could not handle it.

They want to make believe that Roger has done this type of cheating less, so he is some how better.

Earth to ****s, when you cheat you are a cheater period! And forever, you guys need to stop painting yourselfs in a corner.

Even if it is only once, there is no "oh well once is ok, but twice!" BS,



Further more, both players called injury time outs, making them equal cheaters.

They are all cheaters DEAL WITH IT!
Click to expand...

I know he said it. I just don't understand why they don't understand. That was horrible, but he can do that and get away with it, because the pundits aren't going to hold his feet over the coals about it. They're all buddies and agents and what not. They'll laugh it off, or ignore it, and IMO, the fans will blindly follow.

Everything he does and says they deem as right, correct, and better. It's pretty sad, actually, but hey to each his own.
 
fgzhu88

fgzhu88

Semi-Pro
I think the answer to this silly debate lies in whether or not Federer went over his alotted time during the bathroom break. If 2 minutes is the standard changeover time in between sets (if indeed 2 minutes is all he took) then it doesn't matter whether he is taking a ****, wacking off, or sitting on his bench drinking water.

With regard to Nadal, the reason he "happens" to take his T.O.'s when he is down, that is when his adrenaline levels usually drop, thus allowing more pain to be felt. It's a mere physical fact. winning = pain numbed away. Struggling = amplified or returned pain. Nadal is merely responding to his body's natural cues
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
fgzhu88 said:
I think the answer to this silly debate lies in whether or not Federer went over his alotted time during the bathroom break. If 2 minutes is the standard changeover time in between sets (if indeed 2 minutes is all he took) then it doesn't matter whether he is taking a ****, wacking off, or sitting on his bench drinking water.

With regard to Nadal, the reason he "happens" to take his T.O.'s when he is down, that is when his adrenaline levels usually drop, thus allowing more pain to be felt. It's a mere physical fact. winning = pain numbed away. Struggling = amplified or returned pain. Nadal is merely responding to his body's natural cues
Click to expand...

He was gone way longer than 2 minutes. There is no specifically allotted time for bathroom breaks.

It would be nice to know exactly how long he was in there waiting for the sun to set and the air to cool down (his words).
 
mandy01

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
TheTruth said:
I've never heard of this, Roger's interviews with Courier aren't serious. I don't believe that. We only have what he said we can't analyze their motives. That's actually the problem with this whole accusatory thing. No one knows whether Rafa was hurt or not, yet many declare him a cheater. Ironically, Fed admits to gamesmanship, but he wasn't serious.

It was an interview after the match. More than one person saw it as it was telecast worldwide. Everyone knows he said it, if he hadn't you couldn't say he wasn't serious. You've actually proved he did say it, by saying he didn't mean it. So, why would I need more proof?
Click to expand...
Roger has in a FORMAL presser admitted that he dosen't take interviews with Courier seriously.But carry on believing what you want.

And what did he say anyway?What did I prove?
Anyone with a little bit of common sense will know that Roger wasn't expecting a slight shift in shadow that would occur in a span of less than two minutes to make ANY difference in the match at all.
And I saw that part of the match again.Roger wasn't even gone for two whole minutes.So can someone PLEASE explain to me where this gamesmanship occured?

And again please tell us-What admission of using gamesmanship are we talking about?
LOL The funny part is Roger is supposed to have admitted to using gamesmanship when he never actually used it in the first place :lol:
 
Last edited:
mandy01

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
Bud said:
He was gone way longer than 2 minutes. There is no specifically allotted time for bathroom breaks.

It would be nice to know exactly how long he was in there waiting for the sun to set and the air to cool down (his words).
Click to expand...
NO HE WASN'T. QUIT the lies.I SAW that match again..he was gone for less than two minutes and was already BACK when the umpire called time.

As for how long he was waiting for the sun to set and the air to cool-anybody with the slightest amount of common sense would know not to take that seriously at all unless they really think one minute here and there at the most was going to make any difference at all.

Funny how you do the disappearing act everytime someone counters your argument and go and spout out the same lies in other threads.

Nadal fans are REALLY, REALLY clutching at straws.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Nadal gamesmanship?
2 3
Replies
112
Views
7K
Deleted member 733170
D
C
Finally Some Justice: Nadal engages in gamesmanship
4 5 6
Replies
270
Views
45K
serbiavic
serbiavic
jm1980
Tsitsipas: A pattern of gamesmanship and bad behavior
2 3 4
Replies
194
Views
12K
Rorano_Fedalovic
Rorano_Fedalovic
F
Pre-match gamesmanship from Nadal. I love it!
2
Replies
85
Views
10K
TMF
T
OddJack
Nadal: Novak Breathing Problems Gamesmanship
2
Replies
80
Views
8K
DMan
D
Top