2017 French Open FINAL: [3] Stan Wawrinka vs. [4] Rafael Nadal

[swordtennis]

Every cloud, eh? And to all those posters inevitably taking the p1ss out of Djokovic for losing to Wawrinka two years ago, well all I can say is at least Novak managed to win more than six measly games in all his RG matches with Nadal.

Kinda of cool. It just proves we need an in form Djokovic around to keep nadal honest. He runs rampant without him around. Styles make fights. One reason I like pepevic. He goes toe to toe with nadal when he is in form or not on every surface every year every tournament. Now he is burned out tho.

 

[marc45]

FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!


not . ; )​

haha

 

[Atherton2003]

Congrats to Rafa. So happy. He is my favorite tennis player. Imagine if Nadal had won that Australian Open against Fed in Jan. Nadal had that match and that tournament - he was winning in 5th set. If Nadal won Australian Open, it would be Nadal with 16 majors and Fed with 17 majors. You can bet Fed is breathing a sigh of relief.

 

[Rickenbacker4003]

you're currently responding to a glory hunter

one of the worst ones on this forum

not even the FBI and CIA will be able to find him if rafa gets blown out in the first week of wimby

I've been a loyal Nadal glory hunter since 2004. Excuse you.

 

[Rickenbacker4003]

José Morgado‏Verified account @josemorgado

Australia - Federer

Indian Wells - Federer

Miami - Federer

MC - Nadal

Barcelona - Nadal

Madrid - Nadal

Roland Garros - Nadal

#2017

And Nadal was in the final of all those tournaments, so naturally given his 2017 season he would have zero chance at being a danger at Wimby according to some delusional fanboys here.

 

[tennis24x7]

If they were both doing it at ages 39-40 then it surely would be suspicious. Athletes are getting better nowadays. Even guys like Stan, Berdych, Djok, Murray, etc are doing well into their 30s.

also the younger generation being nonsense also helps.

 

[Get A Grip]

once in a while you see what happens when he can, and does, and has to, flatten out a forehand

That was such a stunner. People talking about Waw not playing well!!!!!!!!!!!!! How could he when Rafa hit winners off of what should have been Waw's winners.

 

[DRII]

Kinda of cool. It just proves we need an in form Djokovic around to keep nadal honest. He runs rampant without him around. Styles make fights. One reason I like pepevic. He goes toe to toe with nadal when he is in form or not on every surface every year every tournament. Now he is burned out tho.

sure, sure...

 

[swordtennis]

sure, sure...

You are a really cool guy. Nadal is undefeated when he wins and loses.

 

[swordtennis]

sure, sure...

Is nadal going to take time off again when he loses again?

 

[kandamrgam]

This was the 50th French Open in the Open era. Nadal has won 1/5 of those. [emoji7]

Sent from my NEM-L22 using Tapatalk

 

[abmk]

You're cherry picking. He hit 7 winners and 7 unforced errors in the first set. Stan hit 12 winners and 13 unforced errors. Not much between them that set and neither really played their best, but Stan was clearly going for more. Next set Djokovic hit 6 winners and 14 unforced errors. Stan hit 16 winners and 11 unforced errors. That is terrible stats from Djokovic (-8) who was hitting +5 on average per set the entire tournament. Third set Djokovic hit 7 winners and 9 unforced errors and Stan hit 15 winners and 9 unforced errors. 4th set Djokovic hit 10 winners and 11 unforced errors and Stan hit 17 winners and 12 unforced errors. Djokovic tried to be more aggressive in this set and went up 3-0 but it is too little too late. So he finished the match with 30 winners and 41 unforced errors and -11. Stan finished with 60 winners and 45 unforced errors and +15. So how you think those stats are good for Djokovic is beyond me. Do you know what his stats were going into the match? They were unreal. So you can't tell me that he played a great match and would have beaten anyone else on that day. Not only was he passive and defensive, he was making way more errors than he should have been even playing a passive game. How good his defense was is not important if he can't turn that defense into offense like he usually does, and not taking initiative to play his aggressive game and take it to Wawrinka.

and when he didn't play passive, played aggressive enough, he still went 5 sets vs stan at both AO 13 and AO 14 . So even if he did play really well, there's no guarantee he'd have beaten stan.

I don't think djokovic played a great match at all, nor did I say that. But it was a decent match from him.
probably would have been just, just enough vs murray, though it would be close.
He'd have beaten tsonga, the other SFist as well.

djoko he was just +8 vs Murray --> 56 winners to 48 UEs -- the only other opponent who played well (45 W to 30 UEs vs nadal deserves a mention because its nadal, but nadal was mediocre in that match ) ....yes, his stats were impressive vs the others, but it doesn't count for that much ......

 

[BeatlesFan]

Federer should be pissing in his pants Rafa can be a force at Wimbledon

Why can't the Nadal fans just be happy today? Of all days to be a Nadal fan, today has got to be the sweetest ever.

 

[speedysteve]

We'll done Rafa.
I was rooting for Wawrinka but appreciated Rafa's game today.
I don't think anyone could have resisted the force on display.
Full deserved and nice to have him fully back.

 

[MichaelNadal]

This was the 50th French Open in the Open era. Nadal has won 1/5 of those. [emoji7]

Sent from my NEM-L22 using Tapatalk

Gohan

 

[Manhattan]

This is so incredible. Congrats to his fans. Totally deserved it.

----------------------------------
http://tennisfa.com/?p=7874

 

[Atherton2003]

Nadal looked like he lost a lot of weight. Much fitter looking......and boy, what a good looking guy he is too.

 

[Charleneriva]

So it was Moya's idea to put lead tape on Rafa's racquet? He really is pummeling the ball. I saw 124 kmh average on Rafa's backhand stat a while back. That's big for Rafa. Or just confidence? Or a bit of both?

It's Toni's idea last year but when Moya joined the team they were still being in the trial & error period. Moya has changed Rafa's training regimen to be more specific and effective. Less time on court, but with better results.

Moya also brings calmness and warm encouragement while still being strict and highly demanding. Toni is much harsher and tends to make Rafa get tight and even insecured.

It's a bit of everything, really. His BH has always been at least good. Watch the Nadal vs Wawrinka QF RG13 or further back to the 2008 final again and you'll see what I mean. In many points Fed was giving up trading his FH to Rafa's BH and then of course it's the usual suspects all over again, the "infamous" topspin FH vs OHBH matchup.

Both of those matches were pretty much the same as the final today.

I voted for Rafa in 4 and then rewatched the QF 2013. Well...

 

[Zara]

Congratulations to Nadal!

I really would have liked to see him fight through a tougher draw but it just didn't happen. Thiem was well done after beating Djokovic in the qtr and it was sad, because these new comesers, once they beat a top player they are pretty much done for the tournament. I mean it would be such a riot on TTW or in tennis word if they were to perform a Sampras like performance (1990 USO at 19), where the main goal is to win the tournament and not beat one of the top 4 and be done with. That's the big difference there.

 

[Zara]

We really need both Djokovic and Murray back to top form (Andy's almost there). I would have liked to see both Andy and Nole at the top and all the new players being in top ten but tennis has digressed since the start of this year. I feel we are suddenly back to 2008 again whereas I would really like it to be either 2012 or 2016!

 

[Mike Sams]

also the younger generation being nonsense also helps.

Not sure I'd fully agree with your assertion. Zverev and Dimitrov both pushed Nadal to 5 sets respectively in Australia. Zverev just won his first Masters title on his worst surface but he'll be a lot stronger come Wimbledon and the autumn hardcourt season. The young generation are starting to make in-roads. Slowly but surely. Several of these young guys took out Djokovic in the past few Masters and Roland Garros. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do in the next 6 months. I think we're going to see some good stuff from them, starting at Wimbledon. Nadal is not a lock to win anything outside of clay. And Federer is about to turn 36.

 

[Mike Sams]

We really need both Djokovic and Murray back to top form (Andy's almost there). I would have liked to see both Andy and Nole at the top and all the new players being in top ten but tennis has digressed since the start of this year. I feel we are suddenly back to 2008 again whereas I would really like it to be either 2012 or 2016!

Apart from clay season which Nadal completely dominated, we've seen a lot of very interesting things develop since the beginning of the season. Changes are happening. Future great talents are beginning to emerge. The competition is growing stronger.

 

[Zara]

I am really not a big fan of Stan's game. It's so simple, effective in big matches sometimes yes, but still so simple, so ordinary. It's either a hit or miss. If he hits one winner, the next two points are almost guaranteed to end up as errors. He might as well play blindfolded, why not. Such a brainless game. It's frustrating to see that he's unable to do anything if his own game is threatened. No gameplan, no plan B - just continue to hit through whatever is in front of him, same strategy over and over and over again. It's almost like we've gone back to the cave mentality again.

 

[Mike Sams]

Congratulations to Nadal!

I really would have liked to see him fight through a tougher draw but it just didn't happen. Thiem was well done after beating Djokovic in the qtr and it was sad, because these new comesers, once they beat a top player they are pretty much done for the tournament. I mean it would be such a riot on TTW or in tennis word if they were to perform a Sampras like performance (1990 USO at 19), where the main goal is to win the tournament and not beat one of the top 4 and be done with. That's the big difference there.

The big 4 are the strongest players in the history of tennis. Nobody can beat 3 of the big 4 in a Grand Slam. To go through Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic is a herculean task. Or to go through Federer, Murray, Djokovic...it's just so difficult. Anyone who says the new gen are weak are not respecting the strength of the elite players.

 

[Zara]

Apart from clay season which Nadal completely dominated, we've seen a lot of very interesting things develop since the beginning of the season. Changes are happening. Future great talents are beginning to emerge. The competition is growing stronger.

And Federer dominated AO, IW, Miami etc. Haven't seen anything remotely interesting other than two post prime guys dominating the tour again.

 

[Mike Sams]

I am really not a big fan of Stan's game. It's so simple, effective in big matches sometimes yes, but still so simple, so ordinary. It's either a hit or miss. If he hits one winner, the next two points are almost guaranteed to end up as errors. He might as well play blindfolded, why not. Such a brainless game. It's frustrating to see that he's unable to do anything if his own game is threatened. No gameplan, no plan B - just continue to hit through whatever is in front of him, same strategy over and over and over again. It's almost like we've gone back to the cave mentality again.

Put him on the Australian Open surface against anyone except Federer and he can blow through anyone if he's firing on all cylinders. Nadal's heavy topspin game on bouncy clay was destined to be a nightmare for Stan's style of taking the ball late. It wasn't going to work. People just had hopes that it would.

 

[icedevil0289]

Every cloud, eh? And to all those posters inevitably taking the p1ss out of Djokovic for losing to Wawrinka two years ago, well all I can say is at least Novak managed to win more than six measly games in all his RG matches with Nadal.

idt there was any shame in djokovic losing to stan, different players, different match ups. and djokovic went on to win it the next year so.. all good

 

[Mike Sams]

And Federer dominated AO, IW, Miami etc. Haven't seen anything remotely interesting other than two post prime guys dominating the tour again.

Federer in Miami saved match points against Berdych and was a point or 2 from losing to Kyrgios. He went 5 sets against Wawrinka and Nishikori and Nadal in Australia. Federer didn't exactly dominate. He had to work like hell and get some luck on top for those titles he won.

 

[Zara]

Put him on the Australian Open surface against anyone except Federer and he can blow through anyone if he's firing on all cylinders. Nadal's heavy topspin game was destined to be a nightmare for Stan's style of taking the ball late. It wasn't going to work. People just had hopes that it would.

Maybe one time but he wasn't going to do it consistently. He's not that kind of a man or player otherwise he would have been a force from the start of his career. He caught Djokvovic off guard a couple of times, and much was read into it.

 

[Krish872007]

Federer in Miami saved match points against Berdych and was a point or 2 from losing to Kyrgios. He went 5 sets against Wawrinka and Nishikori and Nadal in Australia. Federer didn't exactly dominate. He had to work like hell and get some luck on top for those titles he won.

Looks like he rediscovered his aura though - that's good enough to "mentally dominate" most of the tour. And literally after winning in Miami, he took the clay season off and said to Rafa, "go tear it up on the clay." And now Nadal has his aura back on clay, potentially on other surfaces too.
Could be an absolute mountain for the other players to climb if they don't believe they can beat either of these two.

 

[icedevil0289]

Federer in Miami saved match points against Berdych and was a point or 2 from losing to Kyrgios. He went 5 sets against Wawrinka and Nishikori and Nadal in Australia. Federer didn't exactly dominate. He had to work like hell and get some luck on top for those titles he won.

to be fair, there are far more players capable on hc than there are on clay.

 

[Zara]

Federer in Miami saved match points against Berdych and was a point or 2 from losing to Kyrgios. He went 5 sets against Wawrinka and Nishikori and Nadal in Australia. Federer didn't exactly dominate. He had to work like hell and get some luck on top for those titles he won.

It doesn't take away the fact that Federer was still the winner of AO, IW and Miami. That's domination. It doesn't matter in what way he did it, he was still the winner of those 3 big tournaments at age 35+.

 

[Mike Sams]

to be fair, there are far more players capable on hc than there are on clay.

Exactly. Grass and hardcourts consist of many scary and considerable threats to the dominance of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray. And many of them are the new generation of players (and a few older) including Zverev, Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Goffin, Thiem, etc. Nadal is impossible to beat on clay. Anywhere else, and it's a different story. Nowhere near as dominant.

 

[Mike Sams]

It doesn't take away the fact that Federer was still the winner of AO, IW and Miami. That's domination. It doesn't matter in what way he did it, he was still the winner of those 3 big tournaments at age 35+.

Of course. No denying that. But how long do you think this will continue? Do you think 5 years from now, a 40 year old Federer will be winning Grand Slams and Masters titles against a 24 year old Zverev who will be much stronger than he is right now? (Maybe he still could but I doubt it) LOL

 

[icedevil0289]

Exactly. Grass and hardcourts consist of many scary and considerable threats to the dominance of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray. And many of them are the new generation of players (and a few older) including Zverev, Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Goffin, Thiem, etc. Nadal is impossible to beat on clay. Anywhere else, and it's a different story. Nowhere near as dominant.

no i agree, i was just saying, nadal dominated clay season the way he did partly because of his amazing play, and imo partly b/c not many great clay court players to challenge him. idk why, but for some reason we are lacking in that department.

 

[Zara]

The big 4 are the strongest players in the history of tennis. Nobody can beat 3 of the big 4 in a Grand Slam. To go through Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic is a herculean task. Or to go through Federer, Murray, Djokovic...it's just so difficult. Anyone who says the new gen are weak are not respecting the strength of the elite players.

Sampras broke through the golden era of tennis. It's utterly doable. Federer and Nadal only got to the level they are now in absence of Djokovic, who's only a shadow of himself these days, let's not forget. One of the new guys could have risen around the same time but these players aren't simply that calibre of a player or at least not yet anyway.

 

[Mike Sams]

Looks like he rediscovered his aura though - that's good enough to "mentally dominate" most of the tour. And literally after winning in Miami, he took the clay season off and said to Rafa, "go tear it up on the clay." And now Nadal has his aura back on clay, potentially on other surfaces too.
Could be an absolute mountain for the other players to climb if they don't believe they can beat either of these two.

I don't see Nadal's aura of invincibility spreading out to other surfaces but I do like his chances at the U.S Open if he can keep up with the solid serving, strong backhand and forehand. Won't be easy though. Nadal has only won 1 non-clay Slam over the past 7 years.

 

[Djokovic2011]

idt there was any shame in djokovic losing to stan, different players, different match ups. and djokovic went on to win it the next year so.. all good

You're right my sweet, and that wasn't exactly one of my classiest posts on here. I just get so irritated at times when people take the mickey out of Novak for his H2H with Wawrinka and make out that he can't beat him, completely forgetting that he's actually won 19 of the 24 matches they've played!

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

no i agree, i was just saying, nadal dominated clay season the way he did partly because of his amazing play, and imo partly b/c not many great clay court players to challenge him. idk why, but for some reason we are lacking in that department.

But still it was Nadal playing Federer in HC finals. Where is these other HC players that is great now? Not any better than clay court specialist Nadal. Its a good reason to believe Rafa will play at least as good, probably better, later HC season than the spring one.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

You're right my sweet, and that wasn't exactly one of my classiest posts on here. I just get so irritated at times when people take the mickey out of Novak for his H2H with Wawrinka and make out that he can't beat him, completely forgetting that he's actually won 19 of the 24 matches they've played!

And Rafa lost one to Waw, in the final. And they say Rafa was not injured

 

[veroniquem]

Kinda of cool. It just proves we need an in form Djokovic around to keep nadal honest. He runs rampant without him around. Styles make fights. One reason I like pepevic. He goes toe to toe with nadal when he is in form or not on every surface every year every tournament. Now he is burned out tho.

Do not write him off. Nadal was in a slump for almost 3 years. Way too soon to write Djoko off. Especially when he has just made a master final and shown some signs of revival toward the end of the clay season.

 

[icedevil0289]

You're right my sweet, and that wasn't exactly one of my classiest posts on here. I just get so irritated at times when people take the mickey out of Novak for his H2H with Wawrinka and make out that he can't beat him, completely forgetting that he's actually won 19 of the 24 matches they've played!

actually I think it was . yeah stan/novak is a very interesting dynamic to me, a fun one, lmao though perhaps not so fun for you. I also dont think that there is any shame in losing to a player like stan. While not the most consistent, when given the opportunity he has the power to blast nearly everyone off court. but ia, people seem to forget that for the most novak still dominates the rivalry and its still never a sure thing. anyway i'm sure novak will be back, but as i said before for the sake of my heart after wimbledon please!

 

[icedevil0289]

And Rafa lost one to Waw, in the final. And they say Rafa was not injured

he might have been, probably was, but let's not pretend that stan wasnt killing it in the first set and a half

 

[BeatlesFan]

Federer didn't exactly dominate. He had to work like hell and get some luck on top for those titles he won.

He's 35 freakin' years old, wins a major and 2 Masters after a sixth month layoff and this is the synopsis of his amazing year?

 

[Mike Sams]

Sampras broke through the golden era of tennis. It's utterly doable. Federer and Nadal only got to the level they are now in absence of Djokovic, who's only a shadow of himself these days, let's not forget. One of the new guys could have risen around the same time but these players aren't simply that calibre of a player or at least not yet anyway.

Well to be honest, Djokovic's sheer dominance lasted 1.5 seasons. His dominance started at AO 2015 all the way up to RG 2016. He accumulated more points than anyone in history. But he was playing out of his skin and that level of play is unsustainable. All the greats had their periods of domination at one time or another.

 

[icedevil0289]

But still it was Nadal playing Federer in HC finals. Where is these other HC players that is great now? Not any better than clay court specialist Nadal. Its a good reason to believe Rafa will play at least as good, probably better, later HC season than the spring one.

lol i just said there was more opportunity for threat on different surfaces, not that they would come to fruition or anything. hmm, i dont know if i was insinuating that, i think he's proven he is beyond that. just meant in general there are more threats on hard than there are on clay for various reasons. it was in response to the other user saying fed didnt exactly dominate because he was close to losing multiple times.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

he might have been, probably was, but let's not pretend that stan wasnt killing it in the first set and a half

Maybe he was inured that too.....
Rafa lost one single match to Waw, one. Waw was killing it because Rafa didnt disarm him like he ususally does.

 

[swordtennis]

Do not write him off. Nadal was in a slump for almost 3 years. Way too soon to write Djoko off. Especially when he has just made a master final and shown some signs of revival toward the end of the clay season.

Vero,
If you say don't write him off I won't write him off. I want another 5 setter on clay with them just with Nole winning it this time.
Then he can call it a career. ha

 

[Mike Sams]

he might have been, probably was, but let's not pretend that stan wasnt killing it in the first set and a half

The look that Nadal gave up to his box at the beginning of the second set told the story. Even he was shellshocked by Stan's bludgeoning shots in Australia.

 

[Mike Sams]

Maybe he was inured that too.....
Rafa lost one single match to Waw, one. Waw was killing it because Rafa didnt disarm him like he ususally does.

Stan beat Djokovic in that same tournament. That gave Stan enough confidence and self-belief against Nadal.