THIS.Well you tried your best Dominic but there's no shame in losing to Nadal on PC. Your time will come one day but in the meantime congrats on an excellent clay court season and all the best for the rest of the year.
Rest assured: Nadal will NOT maintain this level for much longer. Thiem will lift this trophy one day. Hopefully next year.Basically bounce height on Chatrier; Rome was much lower and more balls in the Thiem wheelhouse. Against Nadal today Thiem's forehand was forced into a more spinny shot that could not get through the court. On backhand Thiem was screwed for the same reason and if he dared slice generally Rafa gobbled those balls up. Thiem tried hitting the backhand bloop down the line, but Rafa took those cross court with great effectiveness. Thiem sadly was very gassed by the 3rd set and you could see this in his drooping first serve percentage.
Yes, Nadal can't maintain this level much longer - maybe for the rest of this year. Playing anything like this again in 2018 would be beyond belief. Very unlikely because of age.
He forgot that he was not playing at Rome. To be honest, he started out very well. The first set was a bit of a battle as they usually have been against rafa but I could not believe how early he was pulling the trigger. Bit of a headscratcher to me, but he will learn from this. He has to find the right balance and I think he will, not just on clay but on hard. The jury is still out on grass because of his huge windup, but he has the talent and can take the ball early and in fact return big serves quite well.
To be honest, stan had a lot left in the tank before the match started, but he finished the last set strongly because he was the aggressor (with the right balance). Andy played great tennis but lost his legs because he was chasing down everything. But to your point, no question 30 + is the new 20 + (or maybe 23+) for those professionals who train the right way and have a great support team.
I hope that Theim turns out to be a late bloomer aka Fed. He does show promise, but he needs to tune up that game of his. I also wonder, whether there is a different ring to the evolution of tennis players today? Compared to the players of the millennium, the players from the 70's, 80's, 90's had more success early on (less than 25 years) -think Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Sampras, Agassi. They were considered to in their prime between 21-25.
Maybe Thiem realised early on that he would have to climb a mountain, literally. He was jumping way up into the air for every shot and this in spite of his court position. If Nadal didn't come across as so impressive as maybe in 12/13, it was more because his cruise mode was enough. Sure he was shanking here and there but at other times he was absolutely destroying Thiem so the match was completely on his racquet. I could only watch the first set and parts of the second but I remember they measured one Nadal forehand winner at 4.5/4.8 k rpm. Stan and Murray's winners were measured at 3.5 k time and time again. And it's not like Nadal moonballs to get that RPM contrary to the myth his detractors love to perpetrate. Even when he's crushing it, he's still maintaining a high RPM. What this amounts to is the high inside out forehand is a very high percentage shot for him and he will hit it for a winner 9 out of 10 times. I saw both Stan and Murray miss it on a number of occasions. So how do you stop Nadal for hitting that shot? By pushing him to his forehand corner which for a rightie means taking on his cross court forehand with the backhand. I don't know why people are hoping against hope and am literally laughing at the posts that predicted a Thiem win. We have seen this movie before and so many times. Not GCOAT for nothing. It will take a miracle for Stan to beat him as well. I am chuffed that I got the final I wanted but as much as I'd like Stan to win, my bets are on Nadal.
Thiem has been called Wawrinka 2.0 with good reason, and I would add look at his recent success since he turned 29.
Only if he modifies his game to curtail the mindless ball bashing. Theim had a good chance yesterday, having tremendous confidence of knocking out Djoker, but he was completely bereft of a game plan against Nadal. To me, even his technique still looks raw, given his propensity to spray the shots all over. I feel he needs a good retired Pro to tone it up for him.
So he tanked Rome ?
Did you catch McEnroe saying within the first couple of games that Thiem was the better mover?!? I almost spit my drink out. Where does he come up with this stuff? I mean he said it with half hearted conviction based on Thiem's age blah blah blah blah....but still! Just No.. Nadal gets to everything. I guess even he was spitballing trying to come up with something....anything...that Thiem does better. You have to surprise him and then front run like nobody's business to win against him.
Good improvisation. Have to hand him that !If he needs a little extra time, he just pretends the crowd is too noisy (for his liking)
Plus, it's his anticipation because this is his house...he's always where he needs to be on the court. On Chatrier, he is one with the court. It's simply tough action to beat him here.
maybe but you seem to greatly emphasize rafa's lack of form at rg 2015 for some reason. never said you didn't give players their complete due, just dont think its always coming 100% from a place of objectivity
Sounds like it means "Engage!"
you sure like toot your own horn, I'll say. my main point was you sure liked to harp rafa's bad form as an indication for why novak was able to beat him but nvm we are going in circles here.
Always on point with your thoughts
I don't think it's going to be the battle most people think but we'll see. I do think Stan will be a better battle for Nadal than Thiem was but Nadal should prevail in straights or four. Stan may even win the first set.
So many posters have tried to argue that Nadal in 2015 was in good form (most of them Djokovic fans and ardent Federer fans who hate Nadal.) It would be like trying to argue now that Djokovic isn't in terrible form which some fans were actually trying to convince others of a week ago. There are posters on this forum who actually thought that if Djokovic and Nadal met in the SF, Djokovic in his terrible form would have had a chance this year. OY! That's why I'm saying most fans find it really hard to analyze things properly.
Well then you haven't been paying attention to some of the ludicrous theories on this forum!
Not always for sure but I try. Thanks buddy.
I hope I'm not off with my Nadal beating Stan prediction and don't end up looking silly.
What do you think?
_
Huh?
Yes, okay, that's very cute, but it's kind of bereft of context.
It looks much less "I AM UNDEFEATED" if whoever you are throwing that ENORMOUS gif at also remembers that - unlike the others crowding the Grand Slam ranks between 2003 and now - that those he won are also the only Grand Slam finals he actually MADE.
Stan was certainly playing an aggressive kind of tennis, making both errors and winners left and right, and when someone plays that style of tennis and ends up with more winners, it is impressive.
