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

Who will win?


  • Total voters
    207

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
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 went into the match, iirc beating the defending champion, who imo is like the AO king and a far better hc player than rafa is. why is it so hard for people to admit that nadal on hc especially on a slam he one won time, is not undefeatable
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
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.
lmao, i didnt even bother watching because i figured it would be a straight set victory, and i didnt feel like waking up that early. my dad woke me up and was like you need to watch, stan is playing really well and i woke up and was like what is this?! i knew rafa fans would use this rg match on clay to discredit stan beating rafa at AO. as if stan didnt just also beat novak the match before or a few matches before, i forget if they played semis or qf
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
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.

I totally agree on there is more threats on other surfaces!
I was just pointing out that now it seems that Rafa is the better than these other threats besides Federer. It will be interesting to see if Rafa can continue serving this good and have BH FH weapons on HC.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
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 :D
I think his peak achievement was holding the 4 slams + WTF. Hard to go anywhere up from there and probably part of why his motivation started faltering afterwards...
 
T

Tiki-Taka

Guest
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!
Not to mention he also leads in Major matches 4-3. His recent issue with Stan is blown out of proportion. Denying Djokovic's greatness now would make one sound really desperate.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
stan went into the match, iirc beating the defending champion, who imo is like the AO king and a far better hc player than rafa is. why is it so hard for people to admit that nadal on hc especially on a slam he one won time, is not undefeatable
Rafa has beaten Waw so many times on HC. Dont think Waw will ever beat Nadal except that time. H2H waw Rafa is very telling something was wrong that final. But these things happen.
 

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
I think his peak achievement was holding the 4 slams + WTF. Hard to go anywhere up from there and probably part of why his motivation started faltering afterwards...
Unreal he almost held 6 majors and wtf. Nadal, Murray and Stan were just too much for him FO 2015. If he just had one lesser player in there he prob would have pulled it off.
You think he needs 6 months off or so?
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Rafa has beaten Waw so many times on HC. Dont think Waw will ever beat Nadal except that time. H2H waw Rafa is very telling something was wrong that final. But these things happen.
didnt stan beat him a few years later in paris? also idk why its so hard to understand different surfaces have the ability to bring about different results. js. nadal may have been injured, looking back now its not completely unfathomable that stan would be able to beat or atleast keep up with nadal given what he did with djokovic that year. also 2014 and onwards, stan is different.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
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 ......

If Djokovic would have played the type of tennis he played leading up to that final, then I have no doubt he would have won. Nadal may have not been at his best but it was still Nadal on Chatrier, and had Djokovic not been in his way he may have went further in the tournament and gained more confidence. To me, the match against Nadal is when Djokovic played his best tennis of the tournament. All in all, Djokovic went +9 in the 1st round against Niemenen, +17 the 2nd round against Muller, +22 the 3rd round against Kokkinakis, +22 the 4th round against Gasquet, +15 the QF against Nadal and +8 in the SF against Murray. Why don't the stats against the other players matter much? That actually was an extremely tough draw and he made mince meat out of it until the SF. He actually should have finished the Murray match in 3 sets which I think he was break up in the 3rd set before taking his foot off the gas. He also had a bigger margin the + category over the first 3 sets before Murray turned the match around. But back to the main topic, -11 in a GS final isn't going to cut it against an opponent who is +15, and in my opinion that's not even decent.
 
Last edited:

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Rafa has beaten Waw so many times on HC. Dont think Waw will ever beat Nadal except that time. H2H waw Rafa is very telling something was wrong that final. But these things happen.
also h2h was and still favors novak, but stan beat him at AO and at the USO. guess what on hardcourts, IT IS DIFFERENT. but w/e helps you rafa fans sleep at night, which i'm sure you will do well given the historical event today
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
didnt stan beat him a few years later in paris? also idk why its so hard to understand different surfaces have the ability to bring about different results. js. nadal may have been injured, looking back now its not completely unfathomable that stan would be able to beat or atleast keep up with nadal given what he did with djokovic that year. also 2014 and onwards, stan is different.
I think Stan has been blown out of proportions. It has a lot to do w his ability to take out Novak. Still Novak leads their H2H there too. Rafa has 15 gs and novak 12. Stan not even comparable.
 

marc45

G.O.A.T.
Roland-Garros‏Verified account @rolandgarros
1f3a5.png
@stanwawrinka on playing Nadal in the #RG17 final: "He puts doubts in your head when you play against him."


https://twitter.com/rolandgarros/status/874004487802937344 (video)


#RG17 Stan Wawrinka Press Conference
Stan Wawrinka speaks to the press after losing to Rafael Nadal in the #RG17 final.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
also h2h was and still favors novak, but stan beat him at AO and at the USO. guess what on hardcourts, IT IS DIFFERENT. but w/e helps you rafa fans sleep at night, which i'm sure you will do well given the historical event today
No need to be rude :eek: Im sure Rafa fans in general sleeps very well, dont think many of us thought 10 years ago he would come this far and for sure not come back like this again ;)
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
I think Stan has been blown out of proportions. It has a lot to do w his ability to take out Novak. Still Novak leads their H2H there too. Rafa has 15 gs and novak 12. Stan not even comparable.

whether or not i agree with the stan hype, I can see why it bugs people, all 3 of his slam wins were legitimate now matter how you cut. he has teh ability on a good day to blast anyone off court (aside from obviously rafa on clay) when allowed. also i think that was my point, that h2h is not always indicative of everything. and no one is arguing about total grandslam count and idt anyone is saying he is a better overall player than them. match ups, surfaces, are all factors that should not be discounted imo.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
No need to be rude :eek: Im sure Rafa fans in general sleeps very well, dont think many of us thought 10 years ago he would come this far and for sure not come back like this again ;)
sorry i'm just tired of rafa fans, whenever he loses, brings up injury, and tries to discredit opponents. its not like rafa has never lost to a multitude of players at the AO and even after rafa achieves somethin like he did today, people still want to bring up that match and its annoying.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
sorry i'm just tired of rafa fans, whenever he loses, brings up injury, and tries to discredit opponents. its not like rafa has never lost to a multitude of players at the AO and even after rafa achieves somethin like he did today, people still want to bring up that match and its annoying.
Its not a discredit to an opponent when one knows the other player was injured. Really wish Rafa and Wawrinka could play eachother in a HC major, semi or finals to just end this discussion. Its about matchups and Waw Rafa matchup doesnt favor Waw. Waw Novak its slightly less one sided, still Novak has the upper hand, still a matchup issue. Like it is most of the time in tennis if both play their average level .
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Its not a discredit to an opponent when one knows the other player was injured. Really wish Rafa and Wawrinka could play eachother in a HC major, semi or finals to just end this discussion. Its about matchups and Waw Rafa matchup doesnt favor Waw. Waw Novak its slightly less one sided, still Novak has the upper hand, still a matchup issue. Like it is most of the time in tennis if both play their average level .
match ups imo and also surfaces. prove what? that rafa overall is a better player? they can play a 100 times and imo it still would not take away from that win. I wasnt even trying to argue that everytime they play on hc, stan would win. just explaining why i felt that it was a legitimate win despite rafa beating stan today the way I remember that match was stan coming out, firing all on all cyllinders, rafa looking utterly confused, he gets injured or looks injured in set 2 or 3, takes mto, comes back, stan lets injury get to him and starts playing poorly in set 3 but recovers in set 4. obviously as a rafa fan you look at differently and trust me stan isn't my favorite player but w/e we can just agree to disagree. i swear 20 years from now people will still be cribbing about that match
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
match ups imo and also surfaces. prove what? that rafa overall is a better player? they can play a 100 times and imo it still would not take away from that win. I wasnt even trying to argue that everytime they play on hc, stan would win. just explaining why i felt that it was a legitimate win despite rafa beating stan today the way I remember that match was stan coming out, firing all on all cyllinders, rafa looking utterly confused, he gets injured or looks injured in set 2 or 3, takes mto, comes back, stan lets injury get to him and starts playing poorly in set 3 but recovers in set 4. obviously as a rafa fan you look at differently and trust me stan isn't my favorite player but w/e we can just agree to disagree. i swear 20 years from now people will still be cribbing about that match
I understand this is incredible important for you.
For sure we can agree to disagree. Much nice time ahead to look forward too! I really want new young players to come through I would rather want to win than any of these guys that are in their 30s ;) I am a fan of Rafa but I cheer for younger ones to beat him now. Still, the one that wins deserves it. Vamos everybody :D
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
I understand this is incredible important for you.
For sure we can agree to disagree. Much nice time ahead to look forward too! I really want new young players to come through I would rather want to win than any of these guys that are in their 30s ;) I am a fan of Rafa but I cheer for younger ones to beat him now. Still, the one that wins deserves it. Vamos everybody :D
lol dw I'm good but thanks for being condescending
 

ForumMember

Hall of Fame
Very happy and relieved to see Rafa winning a grand slam after a break of two years and that too in such utterly dominant way. Has been lot of heart aches in these two years and for the same reason it tastes so sweet. Congratulations to all Rafa fans.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Very happy and relieved to see Rafa winning a grand slam after a break of two years and that too in such utterly dominant way. Has been lot of heart aches in these two years and for the same reason it tastes so sweet. Congratulations to all Rafa fans.
I honestly thought that after the hard fought number 9 we would never see a number 10. And winning it so dominant as he did was doing, wow.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
If Djokovic would have played the type of tennis he played leading up to that final, then I have no doubt he would have won. Nadal may have not been at his best but it was still Nadal on Chatrier, and had Djokovic not been in his way he may have went further in the tournament and gained more confidence. To me, the match against Nadal is when Djokovic played his best tennis of the tournament. All in all, Djokovic went +9 in the 1st round against Niemenen, +17 the 2nd round against Muller, +22 the 3rd round against Kokkinakis, +22 the 4th round against Gasquet, +15 the QF against Nadal and +8 in the SF against Murray. Why don't the stats against the other players matter much? That actually was an extremely tough draw and he made mince meat out of it until the SF. He actually should have finished the Murray match in 3 sets which I think he was break up in the 3rd set before taking his foot off the gas. He also had a bigger margin the + category over the first 3 sets before Murray turned the match around. But back to the main topic, -11 in a GS final isn't going to cut it and in my opinion that's not even decent.

other opponents matter, but they don't matter as much - because they are nowhere near as tough as stan playing well or even Murray playing well for that matter.
the one opponent who played well - murray , he was +8 against.

yes, djoko should've ended that match vs Murray sooner, but he didn't. That's the point - he wasn't that invincible as you make him it out to be. he had that great streak of 5 sets (3 vs nadal and 2 vs Murray, but that shattered when Murray took sets 3 and 4 )

The tough draw part only began from QF onwards, not before that.

For your reliance on the W/UE stats only , here's a shocker for you :

1. he was -7 vs Murray in AO 11 final ( 26 winners to 33 UEs) - a match he utterly dominated.
https://matchstat.com/en/tennis/h2h-odds-bets/Andy Murray/Novak Djokovic

2. he was -14 vs Murray in AO 13 final( 47 winners to 61 UEs) - he won it in 4 sets
(The stats. Winners: Djokovic 47 Murray 29; Errors: Djokovic 61 Murray 46; )
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/jan/27/andy-murray-novak-djokovic-live

3. he was -10 vs Murray in AO 16 final ( 31 winners to 41 UEs) - he won it in straights.
https://matchstat.com/en/tennis/h2h-odds-bets/Andy Murray/Novak Djokovic

So all of these were not decent performances ? :D

the winners or UEs are not the biggest component in a match. The forced errors are. Consider those.

again to be clear, he was devastating in the AO 11 final, played well in AO 16 final and fine in the AO 13 final ....just saying W/UE stats alone are not a good indicator.

Again, what you said is still not a response to the point about the AO encounters b/w djokovic and stan, where djokovic played well, wasn't passive and it still went 5 sets on both occasions ( 13, 14)
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
other opponents matter, but they don't matter as much - because they are nowhere near as tough as stan playing well.
the one opponent who played well - murray , he was +8 against.

yes, djoko should've ended that match vs Murray sooner, but he didn't. That's the point - he wasn't that invincible as you make him it out to be.
The tough draw part only began from QF onwards, not before that.

For your reliance on the W/UE stats only , here's a shocker for you :

1. he was -7 vs Murray in AO 11 final ( 26 winners to 33 UEs) - a match he dominated.
https://matchstat.com/en/tennis/h2h-odds-bets/Andy Murray/Novak Djokovic

2. he was -14 vs Murray in AO 13 final( 47 winners to 61 UEs) - he won it in 4 sets
(The stats. The second serve and net points won are the telling ones, along with Djokovic's greater aggression. Aces: Djokovic 8 Murray 7; Double faults: Djokovic 3 Murray 5; 1st serve points won: Djokovic 75% Murray 81%; 2nd serve points won: Djokovic 66% Murray 46%; Winners: Djokovic 47 Murray 29; Errors: Djokovic 61 Murray 46; Net points won: Djokovic 35 Murray 9; Total points won: Djokovic 139 Murray 126.)
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/jan/27/andy-murray-novak-djokovic-live

3. he was -10 vs Murray in AO 16 final ( 31 winners to 41 UEs) - he won it in straights.

So all of these were not decent performances ? :D

the winners or UEs are not the biggest component in a match. The forced errors are. Consider those.

Again, what you said is still not a response to the point about the AO encounters b/w djokovic and stan, where djokovic played well, wasn't passive and it still went 5 sets on both occasions ( 13, 14)

Well you just answered your own question. All the matches are against Murray at the AO. Both great defensive players who are great on med/slow hardcourt. You can also look at the 2012 AO final against Nadal, which was a spectacular match, and Djokovic was -12. Nadal was even farther into the negative. Even the matches against Wawrinka at the AO, they gave gone into the negative more times than not. It mainly has to do with the type of court that the AO is and how the players match up against each other. I actually updated my post a couple of minutes after posting it and said "-11 is not going to cut it against an opponent who is +15" which you missed. If an opponent goes +15 in a match and you are in the negative then it shows you are not playing on the level needed to beat them on the day. That's what I am getting at. Also, if you are +15 on average for the tournament and then go -11 in the final then no you are not playing well and are not decent by your own standards, which is the case for the '15 RG final. Just a case in point: In 2012 AO, Djokovic went -12 against Nadal, -20 against Murray and -4 against Ferrer. So AO is not the best tournament to use to make your argument.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
What happened ? Was Stan just tired or did he act like the his usual RAFA pigeon,,,you are my hero after Roger, I am your pigeon to control and do your bidding,,,,,,, kind of tennis for rafa ????????
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Well you just answered your own question. All the matches are against Murray at the AO. Both great defensive players who are great on med/slow hardcourt. You can also look at the 2012 AO final against Nadal, which was a spectacular match, and Djokovic was -12. Nadal was even farther into the negative. Even the matches against Wawrinka at the AO, they gave gone into the negative more times than not. It mainly has to do with the type of court that the AO is and how the players match up against each other. I actually updated my post a couple of minutes after posting it and said "-11 is not going to cut it against an opponent who is +15" which you missed. If an opponent goes +15 in a match and you are in the negative then it shows you are not playing on the level needed to beat them on the day. That's what I am getting at. Also, if you are +15 on average for the tournament and then go -11 in the final then no you are not playing well and are not decent by your own standards, which is the case for the '15 RG final. Just a case in point: In 2012 AO, Djokovic went -12 against Nadal, -20 against Murray and -4 against Ferrer. So AO is not the best tournament to use to make your argument.

going +15 vs gasquet, muller etc. , it doesn't mean he's going to be +15 vs a zoning Stan.

the average from earlier rounds vs easier opponents doesn't matter that much.
The Murray match is the most important data point here : +8
if we're just considering W/UE.

and obviously djokovic's -11 W/UE did not cut it vs stan's +15..that's not in dispute.
Murray was -12 (36 W to 48 Ues) in the SF and took it to a 5th.
So going by just W/UE, novak's level in the final might just be enough to take that Murray out.

That's why don't just consider the W/UE.

Consider the forced errors.

Take the 72 winners+forced errors to 41 UEs for djokovic -- out of a total of 254 points ---that's a more accurate representation ....
which is a decent perf. on clay vs a zoning player, though not great.

here's another example that might hit the nail on the head :

nadal - 61 W to 44 UEs (+17)
djokovic - 54 W to 75 UEs(-21)

guess, which match this was ? RG 2013 SF, yes, that's right.

so how did djokovic get close ? up a break in the 5th set ?
answer is that djokovic forced 60 errors from rafa, while rafa forced only 41 errors from djokovic

so now it becomes :

102 winners+forced errors for rafa to 44 UEs ( +58)
114 winners+forced errors for djokovic to 75 UEs(+39)

which brings it closer.

the difference in above is basically in the 3rd set where djoko was breadsticked.^^
 

Kozzy

Hall of Fame
sorry i'm just tired of rafa fans, whenever he loses, brings up injury, and tries to discredit opponents. its not like rafa has never lost to a multitude of players at the AO and even after rafa achieves somethin like he did today, people still want to bring up that match and its annoying.

I think you could say the same about some fans of every top player. Excuses abound whenever they lose. Anyway, I'm just happy to see Rafa back in good form, and Roger too. I also have full faith that Djokovic will be back, and probably with a vengeance, sometime within the next 6-12 months. It's good for tennis to have the top guys all playing well, and to have guys like Wawrinka who can put the fear into anyone on any given day. He didn't have it today, or maybe Rafa just had too much, but you just never know, and can't take anything for granted. What's really amazing about Roger, Novak, and Rafa, is how much they have won, not that they ever lose. Losing is normal. Winning that much is not.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
going +15 vs gasquet, muller etc. , it doesn't mean he's going to be +15 vs a zoning Stan.

the average from earlier rounds vs easier opponents doesn't matter that much.
The Murray match is the most important data point here : +8
if we're just considering W/UE.

and obviously djokovic's -11 W/UE did not cut it vs stan's +15..that's not in dispute.
Murray was -12 (36 W to 48 Ues) in the SF and took it to a 5th.
So going by just W/UE, novak's level in the final might just be enough to take that Murray out.

That's why don't just consider the W/UE.

Consider the forced errors.

Take the 72 winners+forced errors to 41 UEs for djokovic -- out of a total of 254 points ---that's a more accurate representation ....
which is a decent perf. on clay vs a zoning player, though not great.

here's another example that might hit the nail on the head :

nadal - 61 W to 44 UEs (+17)
djokovic - 54 W to 75 UEs(-21)

guess, which match this was ? RG 2013 SF, yes, that's right.

so how did djokovic get close ? up a break in the 5th set ?
answer is that djokovic forced 60 errors from rafa, while rafa forced only 41 errors from djokovic

so now it becomes :

102 winners+forced errors for rafa to 44 UEs ( +58)
114 winners+forced errors for djokovic to 75 UEs(+39)

which brings it closer.

the difference in above is basically in the 3rd set where djoko was breadsticked.^^

Well this is true and you have a point, but the lopsided set is what makes it a bigger difference in the +/- stats. What site are you using to see the forced errors?
 

bhpower

Semi-Pro
The match was even just up to 2-2 in the first set, Nadal was nerveous and had made eight UES, From there He just made FOUR UES.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Well this is true and you have a point, but the lopsided set is what makes it a bigger difference in the +/- stats. What site are you using to see the forced errors?

there's almost no site that posts that, which is unfortunate.

you have to derive them from the winners, unforced errors and total points:

Total points won by a player A = winners of A + unforced errors of B + errors forced by player A from player B

errors forced by player A from player B = (total points won by A - winners of A - unforced errors from player B )

so basically , in short hand : TP(A) - W(A) - UE(B)
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...dea-rafael-clay-too-much-stan-wawrinka-handle

"On clay he's just tough to play," Wawrinka said. "There is always one ball coming back. There is always spin on the ball. There is always a different bounce than what the other player makes on that surface. He creates a doubt that you cannot have if you want to beat him. And on clay especially, because the way he's moving, it's even more difficult."
"For sure he's playing the best he's ever played, not only here," Wawrinka said. "I think since the beginning of the year, you can see he's playing more aggressive, staying more close from the line. That's clearly his best he ever played. That's why he's winning so much again."

Many now saying Rafa playing the best tennis he has ever done.
I start to believe the same. In Madrid I thought he was 2013 level. Now he is better. He has never served this well before and mixing it up. BH brilliant. Few UE. FH ON. He is moving great.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
there's almost no site that posts that, which is unfortunate.

you have to derive them from the winners, unforced errors and total points:

Total points won by a player A = winners of A + unforced errors of B + errors forced by player A from player B

errors forced by player A from player B = (total points won by A - winners of A - unforced errors from player B )

so basically , in short hand : TP(A) - W(A) - UE(B)

Oh nevermind, that's too much work. LOL. But I see what you did there.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...dea-rafael-clay-too-much-stan-wawrinka-handle

"On clay he's just tough to play," Wawrinka said. "There is always one ball coming back. There is always spin on the ball. There is always a different bounce than what the other player makes on that surface. He creates a doubt that you cannot have if you want to beat him. And on clay especially, because the way he's moving, it's even more difficult."
"For sure he's playing the best he's ever played, not only here," Wawrinka said. "I think since the beginning of the year, you can see he's playing more aggressive, staying more close from the line. That's clearly his best he ever played. That's why he's winning so much again."

Many now saying Rafa playing the best tennis he has ever done.
I start to believe the same. In Madrid I thought he was 2013 level. Now he is better. He has never served this well before and mixing it up. BH brilliant. Few UE. FH ON. He is moving great.

No he just wants to save his pride and say it's the best Nadal has ever played. But no Nadal has played better and especially on hardcourts. He doesn't have a chance against any Nadal in any of the wins of La Decima. He just got exposed today.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
No he just wants to save his pride and say it's the best Nadal has ever played. But no Nadal has played better and especially on hardcourts. He doesn't have a chance against any Nadal in any of the wins of La Decima. He just got exposed today.
More than Stan saying so. Nadal Waw H2H is saying enough from before, bad matchup for Waw. And Rafa made it worse than ever w his new serve.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/brain-game-nadal-roland-garros-2017
Brain Game: Nadal's 22 Minutes Of Mayhem

I have followed Rafas career closely. He is for sure better than 2013 right now.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
More than Stan saying so. Nadal Waw H2H is saying enough from before, bad matchup for Waw. And Rafa made it worse than ever w his new serve.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/brain-game-nadal-roland-garros-2017
Brain Game: Nadal's 22 Minutes Of Mayhem

I have followed Rafas career closely. He is for sure better than 2013 right now.

Arguable on clay but not on hardcourts for me. Not as punishing from defensive positions as before, and missing some of that explosive speed but let's see how he does in the US swing.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
From ATP:

When serving in the Deuce court, Nadal won a mind-blowing 91 per cent (20/22) of his first-serve points. On second serve, he won 67 per cent (8/12). That never happens.

Nadal faced only one break point for the match, at 1-1, 30/40 in the first set. As expected, Nadal served out wide in the Ad court, but Wawrinka missed a backhand return wide and long. Nadal then hit a 189kmh ace out wide in the Deuce court, and won the following point off a Wawrinka missed forehand return.

Overall for the tournament, Nadal won 72 per cent of his first-serve points, and a mind-blowing 74 per cent of his second-serve points. The Spaniard won 65 per cent (15-23) of his second serve points against Wawrinka.



Beat that! @NoleFam
We can only wait and see if he is able to translate some of this to HC, something he has done before. Hm. Looks pretty good so far.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Oh nevermind, that's too much work. LOL. But I see what you did there.

its some work, but I'm used to it, plus its necessary for an accurate analysis IMO.

Again, getting back to RG 13 SF :
nadal had 8 W to 3 UEs in the 3rd set
djokovic had 5 W to 13 UEs in the 3rd set
(https://web.archive.org/web/2013062...s.com:80/fr_FR/scores/stats/day18/1601ms.html)

even removing those, we have :

nadal : 53 W to 41 UEs(+12)
djokovic : 49 W to 62 UEs(-13)

still a massive gap of 25 total
(remember stan was +15 and djoko -11 in RG 15 final - a total gap of 26)

would you expect nadal-djoko to be 2 all with stats like those with a scoreline of 6-4 3-6 6-7 (3-7) 9-7 (removing the 3rd set) if you just look at winners and unforced errors ?

The reality is there was a only difference of 3 points more for rafa in those 4 sets.

The missing point is that djoko forced a lot more errors from rafa than the other way around, which closes the gap. (22 more forced errors to be exact )
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Im obsessing about Rafas serve. Its remarkable how well he does it. Moya is the perfect one for his team. This is the way for an aging player.
 

disgruntledamsel

Professional
Nadal not losing a set or being challenged with this form and confidence is going into Wimby will be a danger. Kyrgios is mentally unstable, Joker has gone walkabout, Thiem isn't really fit for grass yet. How does Fed handle the time off? I think he'll be fine and Murray is naturally suited better to grass than clay. I think Fed, Nadal and Murray are the top 3 favorites for Wimby.
Don't forget Janowicz! I've waiting for him to make some moves.
 

TheAssassin

G.O.A.T.
its some work, but I'm used to it, plus its necessary for an accurate analysis IMO.

Again, getting back to RG 13 SF :
nadal had 8 W to 3 UEs in the 3rd set
djokovic had 5 W to 13 UEs in the 3rd set
(https://web.archive.org/web/2013062...s.com:80/fr_FR/scores/stats/day18/1601ms.html)

even removing those, we have :

nadal : 53 W to 41 UEs(+12)
djokovic : 49 W to 62 UEs(-13)

still a massive gap of 25 total
(remember stan was +15 and djoko -11 in RG 15 final - a total gap of 26)

would you expect nadal-djoko to be 2 all with stats like those with a scoreline of 6-4 3-6 6-7 (3-7) 9-7 (removing the 3rd set) if you just look at winners and unforced errors ?

The reality is there was a only difference of 3 points more for rafa in those 4 sets.

The missing point is that djoko forced a lot more errors from rafa than the other way around, which closes the gap. (22 more forced errors to be exact )
Hey man, I noticed you've posted detailed stats for several matches in the former pros section, great work. Are you just picking the matches yourself and doing it for fun or did someone request stats for certain matches a long time ago and you've been just working on them?
 
Top