2009 was a fluke, Nadal best player since 2008

[TheLoneWolf]

I wasn't trying to be terribly logical myself. The OP wasn't logical, I was just responding in the same style.

At any rate, I could just respond with "mono destroyed Fed's training regime, training is essential for elite athletes, the lack of training led to poorer performances, causing Federer to lose more often".

OK, I can't argue with that.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

I will wind up laughing so hard if Fed beats Nadal in the final of the US Open...though I fear for the amount of threads that will be posted and TW forums crashing.

Why would that be? Nadal reaching the USO Final would be an excellent result, regardless of whether he won it or not. That being said, on a Fed/Nadal USO final this year, I would put my money on Nadal (and I think many people would too, regardless of who their favorite player is.)

 

[TheLoneWolf]

you do realize, the only reason nadal GOT the world number 1, is because fed had mono right?

Yeah, right. I guess Fed has had a relapse recently. Look at the rankings, you goon.

 

[armsty]

I personally cannot consider people who cannot stay healthy for a season better than someone who can. It's part of the game to condition yourself, and as much as I am going to get slammed for saying this, but Nadal is yet to show his career>Federer's.

There is no doubt though now, he has the game to never lose a match again to Federer, thus he is now better then Federer. Career wise though, he will not become better without a injury free 5-6 years.

 

[DTLshot]

actually, Nadal should feel lucky Fed has been injured in every slam Nadal has won. nadal is very lucky. :roll:

can you hear me?? If not, pull your head out of rafa's rear.

Yeah, I hear ya, you are not only a Nadal hater, but also a Nadal fans hater.

How can you lead such a misarable life?

Somebody here said you just got married?

 

[TheLoneWolf]

I personally cannot consider people who cannot stay healthy for a season better than someone who can. It's part of the game to condition yourself, and as much as I am going to get slammed for saying this, but Nadal is yet to show his career>Federer's.

There is no doubt though now, he has the game to never lose a match again to Federer, thus he is now better then Federer. Career wise though, he will not become better without a injury free 5-6 years.

Why is having no injuries so important? I view injuries as a handicap. If Nadal has been able to achieve 8 slams plus have the all time Masters record by age 24, with all the injuries that he has gone through, I view that as a greater achievement than if he hadn't had any injuries. It's really simple.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Yeah, I hear ya, you are not only a Nadal hater, but also a Nadal fans hater.

How can you lead such a misarable life?

Somebody here said you just got married?

Not cool, man. That is not cool. There are plenty of ways you can attack Drakulie, but that shouldn't be one of them.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Why is having no injuries so important? I view injuries as a handicap. If Nadal has been able to achieve 8 slams plus have the all time Masters record by age 24, with all the injuries that he has gone through, I view that as a greater achievement than if he hadn't had any injuries. It's really simple.

Tough to say. If Nadal played the elegant game Federer did he wouldn't have suffered those injuries. He should have put the time in to learn to play like Fed and not play the ball retriever role for so many years.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Tough to say. If Nadal played the elegant game Federer did he wouldn't have suffered those injuries. He should have put the time in to learn to play like Fed and not play the ball retriever role for so many years.

So what you are saying is that playing a sport exerting force and running a lot is for dumbasses? Wow, thanks for the lesson, man. I had never thought of it before. I was under the impression that sports were about physical strength and skill, and not about looking pretty. I guess that will show me, huh?

 

[MrFlip]

I love it how *******s thinks Nadal would have beaten everyone in 2009 during the period he was injured. And stop using his injury as an excuse. No one runs around like Nadal and doesnt destroy their knees.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

I love it how *******s thinks Nadal would have beaten everyone in 2009 during the period he was injured. And stop using his injury as an excuse. No one runs around like Nadal and doesnt destroy their knees.

Of course he would have beaten everyone had it not been for his injuries. He didn't plan his schedule, and he got screwed. He has nobody to blame for that though, but he still would have owned the tour if it hadn't been for his injuries. Look at how he was doing before his injuries, and look at how he is doing after them.

 

[Ray Mercer]

So what you are saying is that playing a sport exerting force and running a lot is for dumbasses? Wow, thanks for the lesson, man. I had never thought of it before. I was under the impression that sports were about physical strength and skill, and not about looking pretty. I guess that will show me, huh?

Why doed Federer rarely gte injured for extended periods of time? Do you think it might have to do with his aggressive style?

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Why doed Federer rarely gte injured for extended periods of time? Do you think it might have to do with his aggressive style?

Of course Fed gets less injured because his style places less strain on his body. You are making it sound like having a style that places strain on your body is a detriment though. I'm not saying that Nadal should get credit for slams he didn't win because of injuries. I'm saying that having achieved 8 slams at 24 years old, despite injuries, is quite respectable.

 

[mandy01]

Of course he would have beaten everyone had it not been for his injuries. He didn't plan his schedule, and he got screwed. He has nobody to blame for that though, but he still would have owned the tour if it hadn't been for his injuries. Look at how he was doing before his injuries, and look at how he is doing after them.

Based on what?
And Nadal claimed he was injured since MC-he still won those events.

Interestingly he pulled out the injury card in Rotterdam and then went on to win IW.LOL

 

[Ray Mercer]

Of course Fed gets less injured because his style places less strain on his body. You are making it sound like having a style that places strain on your body is a detriment though. I'm not saying that Nadal should get credit for slams he didn't win because of injuries. I'm saying that having achieved 8 slams at 24 years old, despite injuries, is quite respectable.

It's more than respectable but earlier you made it sound as if any slam won with Rafa out or "injured" is a tainted slam. I have heard this opinion several times throughout the forum. The fact is if Nadal is going to continue to play that style any injuries he incurs are his own fault. Federer's 09 French Open and Wimbledon titles are legit wins. If Nadal wanted to be fresh for the US Open and play Wimbledon he should have tried to shorten more points throughout the season. His achievements are incredible but his injuries are his own fault.

 

[mandy01]

Federer did most of the work(make that all to be honest) to get to no1,Nadals injury did help but Feds wins are legit,it's not his fault Nadal was injured

Thanks for the voice of reason.Roger was almost knocked out of the French TWICE inspite of Nadal not being there.But he weathered the strom .He played well tactically even when he wasn't close to his form in his prime years.He definitely played better than in 2008.His opponents gave him as rough a time as anyone.I thought he did very well to win the whole thing when he could've easily lost it all.That match against DP was a great one.

 

[Mun]

Yeah, I hear ya, you are not only a Nadal hater, but also a Nadal fans hater.

How can you lead such a misarable life?

Somebody here said you just got married?

So he won't lead a miserable life now, he will share it :lol:

 

[Mun]

actually, Nadal should feel lucky Fed has been injured in every slam Nadal has won. nadal is very lucky. :roll:

can you hear me?? If not, pull your head out of rafa's rear.

Yeah Fed is always injured...I say he will be done at 28 :lol:

 

[mltaylor]

I always knew 2009 was a fluke, some of you guys had trouble seeing it.
Nadal is the best player since 2008. His dominance winning Roland Garros, Wimbledon, Olympics, Masters Series and next year's AO left little doubt.
Only bad luck with his knees stopped him last year so Fed won RG and Wimbledon being extremely lucky and with the best man out of contest. Fed should feel really lucky and grateful for those 2 extra lucky Slams.
Order has been restored in 2010 with healthy Nadal beating in finals both guys that beat Fed in straight sets LOL!

Also, the rivalry with Soderling and Berdych belongs to Federer and his fans now. Nadal owns both of them on all surfaces and beat them in straight sets in the most important match of their careers. Long life healthy Nadal. King of tennis and future GOAT!

Injuries are part of a players tennis career in the end. It counts against them for everyone. By your logic Evert and Navratilova are extremely lucky to get the titles they got due to the injuries that Tracy Austin dealt with.

Delpo is another example. Hopefully he can get back to form of last year and make things interesting. It's a shame he has missed out in the majors this year but injuries are a part of sports. Everyone has them to a degree it's just how they handle and recover from them that counts.

I would say Federer and Sampras have been pretty lucky to have had a limited amount of ailments in their careers. It seems Krajicek may have been on the other side of the spectrum though.

It's a little before my time but it's to bad Borg decided to call it quits so soon. He seemed to have a relatively healthy tennis career. Who knows how high the bar (GS's) may have been had he stayed or played AO.

Anyways, point is, things can change in a heartbeat just like the last couple of years. : )

 

[Mun]

It's more than respectable but earlier you made it sound as if any slam won with Rafa out or "injured" is a tainted slam. I have heard this opinion several times throughout the forum. The fact is if Nadal is going to continue to play that style any injuries he incurs are his own fault. Federer's 09 French Open and Wimbledon titles are legit wins. If Nadal wanted to be fresh for the US Open and play Wimbledon he should have tried to shorten more points throughout the season. His achievements are incredible but his injuries are his own fault.

No, they aren't. It's bad luck. So is Hewitt's hip injury his fault? Haas' shoulder injury or whatever it was? Tsonga's knee? Djokovic breathing problems? Murray's knee? Fed's back, stomach virus and weak inmune system? Noooo!!! Whatever you do, if you play pro tennis you will be injured. Yeah luck plays a big role in health of players.

 

[davey25]

Injuries are part of a players tennis career in the end. It counts against them for everyone. By your logic Evert and Navratilova are extremely lucky to get the titles they got due to the injuries that Tracy Austin dealt with.

Austin was a great player but I am always surprised people think she would have made that huge a dent in the careers of Evert and Navratilova. She did play until 1983 when she was 20, about to turn 21. She won only 2 slams, although she won some of the major Slims Champinships which were considered bigger than the Australian and French some of those years. Mandlikova the perennial #3 during the period of complete Evert-Navratilova dominance began to regularly beat Austin in 1982 onwards.

I could possibly see her going on to win more slams but I dont see her making as big a dent on Martina and Chris as some. She looks to me like someone who had a rather simplistic game and peaked out fairly early. She also wasnt that versatile, she was great on hard courts and indoors, not so formidable on grass or clay. Unfortunately for her there wasnt 2 hard court slams until 1987 which limits her chances. Navratilova of 82-87 was far too powerful and athletic for her I believe. You look at the 81 U.S Open final and Austin absolutely could not handle Martina in full stride, but Martinas nerves and a mental collapse of sorts allowed a scrappy determined Austin to snare the title in the end. Evert began to dominate Austin again in 82 and 83, and gradually did better in the matchup after figuring out Austins game in the 80 U.S Open semis. Anyway all of Everts slams were at the French on clay or the Australian Open on grass, not places Austin seemed likely to beat Chris despite owning Chris for a period while coming up (amost exclusively on hard courts or indoors).

 

[Mun]

Only a bit of bad luck with Federer getting mono in 2008 allowed Nadal to dominate...

Look, bad luck happens to the players. It's pretty irrelevant. Federer won what he won in 2009, and Nadal is streets ahead in 2010.

What a joke to compare suspicious Fed's mono in 2008 -as he didn't miss any tournament- with Nadal's knee injury in 2009 which clearly affected his game in RG and made him miss Wimbledon.
Fed really benefited from Nadal's absence in 2009, however all Nadal won in 2008, 2009 and 2010 was because he was the better player.
Djokovic won the AO in 2008, not Nadal. Nadal always beat healthy Fed in all the Slams he won, even being exhausted like in AO 2009 .

 

[pmerk34]

What a joke to compare suspicious Fed's mono in 2008 -as he didn't miss any tournament- with Nadal's knee injury in 2009 which clearly affected his game in RG and made him miss Wimbledon.
Fed really benefited from Nadal's absence in 2009, however all Nadal won in 2008, 2009 and 2010 was because he was the better player.
Djokovic won the AO in 2008, not Nadal. Nadal always beat healthy Fed in all the Slams he won, even being exhausted like in AO 2009 .

Stop with the excuses

 

[wangs78]

The thing is the following:

In 2008, Nadal takes over Federer, spank him in the final of RG, beat him in the final of Wimbledon, win the Olympic gold, the MS of Toronto and take the number one spot. In the beginning of 2009, Nadal won his first grand slam on hardcourt, defeating again Federer in the final, start to dominate the clay season.

Then Nadal has a big knee injury. Federer take the opportunity, take RG, Wimbledon, regain the number one ranking, wins the OA.

And as soon as Nadal is back to his best, he wins RG and Wimbledon like in 2008 and is back to the number one rankings.

It looks like Federer returning to the number one ranking was mainly due to Nadal injury.

Then Nadal's '08 Wimby is due to Federer having to recover from mono.

 

[veroniquem]

2009 was not a fluke, it was a nightmare. I'm so happy it's behind us! But I agree with you: noone "figured out" Rafa's game in 2009. He struggled with his own body more than with opponents. In absolute terms, I agree he should have stayed the best player since 2008.
However, whatever happened happened and there is no way to change it now. I'm just thankful he picked up things where he left them before the knee problems and he is today at the spot where he belongs: the top one.

 

[TheTruth]

2009 was not a fluke, it was a nightmare. I'm so happy it's behind us! But I agree with you: noone "figured out" Rafa's game in 2009. He struggled with his own body more than with opponents. In absolute terms, I agree he should have stayed the best player since 2008.
However, whatever happened happened and there is no way to change it now. I'm just thankful he picked up things where he left them before the knee problems and he is today at the spot where he belongs: the top one.

You sound like Brad Gilbert. He said that during one of the pre-matches.

 

[Gen]

Nadal's 2010 RG and Wimbledon are not legit because Federer was old and downhill.

Is he dead? If not, why do you say "was"?

 

[KingOfTennis]

nadal sucks at tennis

 

[Murrayfan31]

nadal sucks at tennis

Agreed. So does Federer though.

 

[Semi-Pro]

Muzza is the real GOAT...just you people wait.

 

[hawk eye]

I love it how *******s thinks Nadal would have beaten everyone in 2009 during the period he was injured. And stop using his injury as an excuse. No one runs around like Nadal and doesnt destroy their knees.

You're so wrong. Don"t you see what they do to Rafa.. they play the bal left and right allt he time, so that he has to keep running down them while they all know he's got tendinitits and all!! It's just so low, so mean..

 

[Rippy]

You're so wrong. Don"t you see what they do to Rafa.. they play the bal left and right allt he time, so that he has to keep running down them while they all know he's got tendinitits and all!! It's just so low, so mean..

Yeah, they shouldn't try to beat him at all.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Based on what?
And Nadal claimed he was injured since MC-he still won those events.

Interestingly he pulled out the injury card in Rotterdam and then went on to win IW.LOL

Common sense.

I'm missing your other point. Do you mean that Nadal managed to win IW while injured? If so, how is that a point against him? Other than the fact that he shouldn't have played probably.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

It's more than respectable but earlier you made it sound as if any slam won with Rafa out or "injured" is a tainted slam. I have heard this opinion several times throughout the forum. The fact is if Nadal is going to continue to play that style any injuries he incurs are his own fault. Federer's 09 French Open and Wimbledon titles are legit wins. If Nadal wanted to be fresh for the US Open and play Wimbledon he should have tried to shorten more points throughout the season. His achievements are incredible but his injuries are his own fault.

Yes, I agree. Those titles for Fed are not tainted. He just had to wait for Nadal being injured to win RG, but that doesn't mean that he didn't win RG.