Now will people finally STOP claiming that Nadal would have beaten Fed at the USOpen?

BreakPoint · Nov 28, 2010

All the *********s that claimed that Nadal would have definitely beaten Federer in this year's US Open final now need to keep quiet and go hide under a rock.

It's just a shame that Djokovic got so lucky on those two wild swings that landed in on those two match points in the semis or else Nadal will still be without the US Open trophy and his career Slam, and Federer would still own Nadal on hardcourts.

HunterST · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint said:
All the *********s that claimed that Nadal would have definitely beaten Federer in this year's US Open final now need to keep quiet and go hide under a rock.

It's just a shame that Djokovic got so lucky on those two wild swings that landed in on those two match points in the semis or else Nadal will still be without the US Open trophy and his career Slam, and Federer would still own Nadal on hardcourts.

We can't really say that today proves Federer would have won back in August.

What we CAN say, however, is that the claims that Federer wouldn't have had a chance to win and that he was lucky to have lost in the semi (so as to avoid a devastating loss) were false.

Tennis_Monk · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint said:
All the *********s that claimed that Nadal would have definitely beaten Federer in this year's US Open final now need to keep quiet and go hide under a rock.

It's just a shame that Djokovic got so lucky on those two wild swings that landed in on those two match points in the semis or else Nadal will still be without the US Open trophy and his career Slam, and Federer would still own Nadal on hardcourts.

How is USOPEN result connected with ATP final ?. Different surfaces, different times, different countries , different weather,.....

OrangePower · Nov 28, 2010

Tennis_Monk said:
How is USOPEN result connected with ATP final ?. Different surfaces, different times, different countries , different weather,.....

^^^^, plus, players in different form, and 5 sets vs 3 sets.

Polaris · Nov 28, 2010

HunterST said:
What we CAN say, however, is that the claims that Federer wouldn't have had a chance to win and that he was lucky to have lost in the semi (so as to avoid a devastating loss) were false.

This, exactly.

BreakPoint · Nov 28, 2010

Tennis_Monk said:
How is USOPEN result connected with ATP final ?. Different surfaces, different times, different countries , different weather,.....

Because Federer has won the US Open 5 times and has won the WTF 5 times, while Nadal had never won the US Open until this year and still has never won the WTF. That's why! Very, very lucky for Nadal that he didn't have to face Federer at the US Open this year.

Tennis_Monk · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Because Federer has won the US Open 5 times and has won the WTF 5 times, while Nadal had never won the US Open until this year and still has never won the WTF. That's why! Very, very lucky for Nadal that he didn't have to face Federer at the US Open this year.

So why didnt Nadal face Federer at USO final this year?. Could it be because Federer wasnt good enough (at this USO) to make it to final?

Federer has Won AUS open 3 times (now 4) before Nadal beat him (and Nadal hasnt won before). Per your logic Federer should have beat Nadal ??

8PAQ · Nov 28, 2010

OrangePower said:
^^^^, plus, players in different form, and 5 sets vs 3 sets.

If WTF final was best of 5 Nadal would have been eating a bagel along with that bread stick.

MrFlip · Nov 28, 2010

Nadal still would have won only because Federer was in a sort-of rut. Dismissed Soderling in straight sets but wasnt playing inspiring tennis like he did back in Jan. Nadal had it very, very easy mind you. Would have been a tight 4 or 5 setter. (Fed fan by the way)

Mustard · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint said:
All the *********s that claimed that Nadal would have definitely beaten Federer in this year's US Open final now need to keep quiet and go hide under a rock.

It's just a shame that Djokovic got so lucky on those two wild swings that landed in on those two match points in the semis or else Nadal will still be without the US Open trophy and his career Slam, and Federer would still own Nadal on hardcourts.

And you know this how? Have you stepped into an alternate dimension where Federer beat Djokovic at this year's US Open?

It's irrelevant anyway. Djokovic beat Federer, Nadal beat Djokovic. End of :razz:

abmk · Nov 28, 2010

HunterST said:
We can't really say that today proves Federer would have won back in August.

What we CAN say, however, is that the claims that Federer wouldn't have had a chance to win and that he was lucky to have lost in the semi (so as to avoid a devastating loss) were false.

^^

this

10 chars

Defcon · Nov 28, 2010

It is obvious that on a HC, Fed goes as heavy favorite. On clay, Nadal is the favorite. On grass (which is to all intents and purposes clay) its anyones game.

JoelDali · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Because Federer has won the US Open 5 times and has won the WTF 5 times, while Nadal had never won the US Open until this year and still has never won the WTF. That's why! Very, very lucky for Nadal that he didn't have to face Federer at the US Open this year.

The light of truth knows Fed is the true USO 2010 champion had Joker missed the crazy swinging arse volleys. Joker has casually insinuated many times those shots were really lucky.

BreakPoint · Nov 28, 2010

Tennis_Monk said:
So why didnt Nadal face Federer at USO final this year?. Could it be because Federer wasnt good enough (at this USO) to make it to final?

Federer was good enough to make the final. Unfortunately, luck was not on his side and Djkovic's two wild swings on two match points both landed in. Now why didn't Nadal make the US finals in '04? or '05? or '06? or '07 or '08 or '09? Oh yeah, because he isn't good enough! Now guess who is good enough to have made the finals in ALL 6 of those years?

Tennis_Monk said:
Federer has Won AUS open 3 times (now 4) before Nadal beat him (and Nadal hasnt won before). Per your logic Federer should have beat Nadal ??

Yes, he should have. Nadal can thank Federer's back injury that it didn't happen.

BreakPoint · Nov 28, 2010

MrFlip said:
Nadal still would have won only because Federer was in a sort-of rut. Dismissed Soderling in straight sets but wasnt playing inspiring tennis like he did back in Jan. Nadal had it very, very easy mind you. Would have been a tight 4 or 5 setter. (Fed fan by the way)

Nope. Federer played awesome incredible tennis at this year's US Open until the semis. He had one bad match. Had Djokovic missed on those two match points, I'm sure Federer would have brought out his best again in the final against Nadal.

BreakPoint · Nov 28, 2010

Mustard said:
And you know this how? Have you stepped into an alternate dimension where Federer beat Djokovic at this year's US Open?

It's irrelevant anyway. Djokovic beat Federer, Nadal beat Djokovic. End of :razz:

The same way scientists can calculate the results of an experiment before even conducting the experiment.

Mustard · Nov 28, 2010

BreakPoint, you're dreaming. Nadal is the US Open champion

Greg · Nov 28, 2010

Break out your tin foil hats, boys and girls. We're posting in a BreakPoint thread!

NamRanger · Nov 28, 2010

Mustard said:
And you know this how? Have you stepped into an alternate dimension where Federer beat Djokovic at this year's US Open?

It's irrelevant anyway. Djokovic beat Federer, Nadal beat Djokovic. End of :razz:

Only such logic applies when you want it to. When it comes to Federer's FO 2008 victory though, it still has an astrix because he never had to beat Nadal.

powerangle · Nov 28, 2010

We'll never know what would have happened if Federer played Nadal in this year's US Open final. If Federer played his best hard court tennis it would probably be too much for Nadal, but we all know that Fed can unleash the very best mental midgetry when he has to play Humbalito

Hopefully this can be laid to rest next year when they face off in the US Open final!

TomorrowNeverComes · Nov 28, 2010

Plus, poor things must keep in mind that US Open surface MUCH more suits Fed than this WTF. Would have been a beatdown had they met in the final of the USO. Thank Roger that your boy won (is there a verb of "luck", lucked?) that title.

cork_screw · Nov 28, 2010

I love how ******** these hypotheticals are. You know what's more ******** than hypotheticals? People trying to rationalize what they "want" for what already happened. There's your philosophy for the day, NOW SHUT THE F*** UP.

batz · Nov 29, 2010

BreakPoint said:
All the *********s that claimed that Nadal would have definitely beaten Federer in this year's US Open final now need to keep quiet and go hide under a rock.

It's just a shame that Djokovic got so lucky on those two wild swings that landed in on those two match points in the semis or else Nadal will still be without the US Open trophy and his career Slam, and Federer would still own Nadal on hardcourts.

This is all moot. Roger didn't play well enough to make the final - that's the only fact.

Xemi666 · Nov 29, 2010

No. Nadal would have beaten Federer at the USO. Not like it matters because Federer didn't get to the final, so he didn't deserve to be there.

NamRanger · Nov 29, 2010

Xemi666;5224350[B said:
]No. Nadal would have beaten Federer at the USO. Not like it matters because Federer didn't get to the final, so he didn't deserve to be there.[/B]

How do you know?

Netspirit · Nov 29, 2010

Federer could have beaten Nadal at the USO 2010, but it would have been more difficult.

First of all, the fitness factor would have favored Nadal (after Federer's grueling 5-setter against Djokovic).
Second, Federer's form - specifically approaches, returns, volleys and backhand - has improved since the USO. He has worked on it (according to him), and it shows.
Third, Nadal looked less sharp yesterday than he did during the USO. His serve and his movement were nowhere near that level.

Having said that, I do agree that Federer > Nadal on hard courts. However, that particular match could have gone either way.

TomorrowNeverComes · Nov 29, 2010

Xemi666 said:
No. Nadal would have beaten Federer at the USO. Not like it matters because Federer didn't get to the final, so he didn't deserve to be there.

Remind me where was Nadal when Fed made it 5 times to the finals at the US Open? Aha!

Xemi666 · Nov 29, 2010

TomorrowNeverComes said:
Remind me where was Nadal when Fed made it 5 times to the finals at the US Open? Aha!

I don't answer a troll's questions sorry

TomorrowNeverComes · Nov 29, 2010

Xemi666 said:
I don't answer a troll's questions sorry

So easy to put Rafafans at a deadlock.

BreakPoint · Nov 29, 2010

Xemi666 said:
No. Nadal would have beaten Federer at the USO. Not like it matters because Federer didn't get to the final, so he didn't deserve to be there.

Um...because faster courts favor Nadal more than slower courts do? :???:

If Nadal can't even beat Federer on a slow hard court like at the WTF, how in the world is Nadal going to beat Federer on a fast hard court like at the US Open?

The courts at Cincinnati are the same speed as at the US Open. How many times as Nadal won Cincy? Zero! How many times has Federer won? Four.

BreakPoint · Nov 29, 2010

TomorrowNeverComes said:
Remind me where was Nadal when Fed made it 5 times to the finals at the US Open? Aha!

You mean 6 consecutive times ('04-'09).

MichaelNadal · Nov 29, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Federer was good enough to make the final. Unfortunately, luck was not on his side and Djkovic's two wild swings on two match points both landed in. Now why didn't Nadal make the US finals in '04? or '05? or '06? or '07 or '08 or '09? Oh yeah, because he isn't good enough! Now guess who is good enough to have made the finals in ALL 6 of those years?

Yes, he should have. Nadal can thank Federer's back injury that it didn't happen.

You are the single biggest troll on this board. I hope, I REALLY hope your stupidity is intentional.

BreakPoint · Nov 29, 2010

MichaelNadal said:
You are the single biggest troll on this board. I hope, I REALLY hope your stupidity is intentional.

Thanks for agreeing that I'm the wisest person on this board. I really do appreciate it.

MichaelNadal · Nov 29, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Thanks for agreeing that I'm the wisest person on this board. I really do appreciate it.

More like the least objective.

MixieP · Nov 29, 2010

Your question...

Now will people finally STOP claiming that Nadal would have beaten Fed at the USOpen?

...merits a poll.
:wink:

xRain · Nov 29, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Yes, he should have. Nadal can thank Federer's back injury that it didn't happen.

Federer can thank Nadal's knee injuries for his French Open win

Xemi666 · Nov 29, 2010

NamRanger said:
How do you know?

Nadal was playing much better, it's 5 set matches (if you hadn't noticed Federer didn't do very well in 5 set matches tournament this year after AO), and the proof is in the pudding, Federer wasn't good enough to get to the finals, everything else is just speculation, and this thread is a clear troll attempt by the biggest troll on this boards.

thejoe · Nov 29, 2010

Who cares? Rafa made the final and Federer didn't. All other speculation is irrelevant.

Mustard · Nov 29, 2010

NamRanger said:
Only such logic applies when you want it to. When it comes to Federer's FO 2008 victory though, it still has an astrix because he never had to beat Nadal.

FO 2008? When Nadal beat Federer 6-1, 6-3, 6-0?

FTS · Nov 29, 2010

LoL, that's called a *******ian slip.

NamRanger · Nov 29, 2010

Mustard said:
FO 2008? When Nadal beat Federer 6-1, 6-3, 6-0?

Woops, meant 2009. You know what I mean though. Still doesn't ignore the fact that Nadal fans will continue to say that Federer's 2009 victory at the FO is undeserved.

Xemi666 said:
Nadal was playing much better, it's 5 set matches (if you hadn't noticed Federer didn't do very well in 5 set matches tournament this year after AO), and the proof is in the pudding, Federer wasn't good enough to get to the finals, everything else is just speculation, and this thread is a clear troll attempt by the biggest troll on this boards.

Nadal was playing much better because he faced weak opponents all the way up until the final. That's a fact. And two, Federer owns Nadal on fast uniform bouncing surfaces. Nadal has managed to scrape ONE win, in a match that Federer clearly should have won but choked.

ksbh · Nov 29, 2010

Tough luck for Nadal at the U.S Open. He would have beaten Federer at all 4 slam finals if giant nose hadn't tanked against Djokovic! Now that would have been a crowning glory.

FTS · Nov 29, 2010

ksbh said:
Tough luck for Nadal at the U.S Open. He would have beaten Federer at all 4 slam finals if giant nose hadn't tanked against Djokovic! Now that would have been a crowning glory.

yeah just like his year end "crowning glory" :mrgreen:

ksbh · Nov 29, 2010

LOL, true! But let's not get too far ahead ... it's an important event but it ain't anywhere close to the importance of a slam. We'll see what happens when they play each other at a slam. If I had a lot of money, there's no question who my money will be on

FTS said:
yeah just like his year end "crowning glory" :mrgreen:

big bang · Nov 29, 2010

BreakPoint said:
Nope. Federer played awesome incredible tennis at this year's US Open until the semis. He had one bad match. Had Djokovic missed on those two match points, I'm sure Federer would have brought out his best again in the final against Nadal.

sure, like he allways do at slam finals right?

. Only person thats lucky is Fed, how would he look having lost to Nadal in the final at all 4 majors?. Not very good for his legacy right?

FTS · Nov 29, 2010

who you lose to on a day, that's not legacy. he could be 0-22 with nadal, it's how many slams are tucked in the bag that counts. any pro would rather be a in F than SF. see my avatar that's a slam graph for Fed, Nad, and Samps. to just keep up with Fed he has to win at least 2 slams next year.

ksbh · Nov 29, 2010

Tough luck for Nadal. He must have been lickin his chops waiting for Federer in the final, only to find a Serbian

There's always next year though ... as long as there's no bad light or a disease that saps energy out of Swiss people with big noses! ROFL!

big bang said:
sure, like he allways do at slam finals right?. Only person thats lucky is Fed, how would he look having lost to Nadal in the final at all 4 majors?. Not very good for his legacy right?

niff · Nov 29, 2010

FTS said:
who you lose to on a day, that's not legacy. he could be 0-22 with nadal, it's how many slams are tucked in the bag that counts. any pro would rather be a in F than SF. see my avatar that's a slam graph for Fed, Nad, and Samps. to just keep up with Fed he has to win at least 2 slams next year.

Ha, I've been wondering what your avvie was...

Tennis_Monk · Nov 29, 2010

FTS said:
who you lose to on a day, that's not legacy. he could be 0-22 with nadal, it's how many slams are tucked in the bag that counts. any pro would rather be a in F than SF. see my avatar that's a slam graph for Fed, Nad, and Samps. to just keep up with Fed he has to win at least 2 slams next year.

Sampras has a lot of Clay legacy to add to the discussion.

Sampras is completely out of the race now dude. Roger and Rafa showed that if one is a good enough player they can win on all surfaces. Ofcourse he has 14 slams to hang on (5 more than Rafa) for a lil bit of time. Assuming that you considered that and hence put Sampras in discussion.

FTS · Nov 29, 2010

Tennis_Monk said:
Sampras has a lot of Clay legacy to add to the discussion.

Sampras is completely out of the race now dude. Roger and Rafa showed that if one is a good enough player they can win on all surfaces. Ofcourse he has 14 slams to hang on (5 more than Rafa) for a lil bit of time. Assuming that you considered that and hence put Sampras in discussion.

he's just there for reference as the next best after fedal

Now will people finally STOP claiming that Nadal would have beaten Fed at the USOpen?

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Banned

Professional

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Talk Tennis Guru

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Rookie

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Banned

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Banned

Professional

Banned

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

xRain

Guest

Professional

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Legend

Hall of Fame

Banned

Similar threads