A Word on Nadal and Wawrinka Matchup

[REKX]

We know about matchups. For example the famous one, Nadal has a matchup advantage over Federer. I would say Wawrinka also has a good matchup against Djokovic for example.

I think the Nadal Wawrinka matchup favours Nadal. I saw them live in London after Wawrinka won that amazing French Open.

Wawrinka wants to stay back, and let the ball sit up and them pummel it forehand or backhand - amazing to watch. I noticed with Nadal he doesn't get that time.

I feel during their matches Nadal does stand a little bit closer in the baseline, and takes the ball more on the rise. Of course he can do that because he has an extreme low to high forehand action which means Nadal can take the ball early and on the rise, but still hit true meaning he doesn't give the advantage away.

Wawrinka showed us what he could do against Djokovic in the French Open final they played. Federer or Nadal haven't been able to peg Djokovic back like the way Wawrinka done that day so that is why I feel Nadal has the matchup advantage, takes away time from Wawrinka during their rallies.

Also Wawrinka likes to stay back and hit amazing powerful shots, and on clay this has worked so well for him recently. Nadal obviously plays with more topspin than any other player which means Wawrinka is having to hit that much higher which I think is a touch above his comfortable hitting zone.

Either way I'm a fan of both, after Nadal and Federer, Wawrinka is my favourite player. There will be amazing shots and winners by Wawrinka in the final tomorrow and it really is a case of the all out attacker vs the relentless defender.

I would be happy for either to win. Nadal goes in as favorite, but they are both French Open champions and amazing clay court players.

 

[Centre Court]

I hope Wawrinka wins

 

[RF-18]

15-3 in Nadals favour.

Pretty one sided match up.

 

[Rafa24]

I hope Wawrinka wins

Not a surprise, you don't want Rafa getting closer to Feds 18. Sad that fed fans are so salty like that. I hated seeing Rafa lose the AO but was happy for fed.

 

[REKX]

15-3 in Nadals favour.

Pretty one sided match up.

I was more talking about since 2014, obviously Wawrinka's game as hugely improved.

Wawrinka was the only one that could outplay Djokovic when Djokovic was dominating these years.

 

[REKX]

Not a surprise, you don't want Rafa getting closer to Feds 18. Sad that fed fans are so salty like that. I hated seeing Rafa lose the AO but was happy for fed.

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

Have to admit when I started watching tennis I was Federer only fan, but as time went by I learnt to appreciate Nadal and feel sad sometimes knowing we probably won't get players like Federer and Nadal ever again.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

We know about matchups. For example the famous one, Nadal has a matchup advantage over Federer. I would say Wawrinka also has a good matchup against Djokovic for example.

I think the Nadal Wawrinka matchup favours Nadal. I saw them live in London after Wawrinka won that amazing French Open.

Wawrinka wants to stay back, and let the ball sit up and them pummel it forehand or backhand - amazing to watch. I noticed with Nadal he doesn't get that time.

I feel during their matches Nadal does stand a little bit closer in the baseline, and takes the ball more on the rise. Of course he can do that because he has an extreme low to high forehand action which means Nadal can take the ball early and on the rise, but still hit true meaning he doesn't give the advantage away.

Wawrinka showed us what he could do against Djokovic in the French Open final they played. Federer or Nadal haven't been able to peg Djokovic back like the way Wawrinka done that day so that is why I feel Nadal has the matchup advantage, takes away time from Wawrinka during their rallies.

Also Wawrinka likes to stay back and hit amazing powerful shots, and on clay this has worked so well for him recently. Nadal obviously plays with more topspin than any other player which means Wawrinka is having to hit that much higher which I think is a touch above his comfortable hitting zone.

Either way I'm a fan of both, after Nadal and Federer, Wawrinka is my favourite player. There will be amazing shots and winners by Wawrinka in the final tomorrow and it really is a case of the all out attacker vs the relentless defender.

I would be happy for either to win. Nadal goes in as favorite, but they are both French Open champions and amazing clay court players.

Had.

Perhaps the Swiss have a tolerance for thorns that exceeds the average bear's. Only pluck 'em once the 30s roll around (or once they're closer to 40 than 30, in some cases ).

 

[tennis_pro]

15-3 in Nadals favour.

Pretty one sided match up.

Do some people never learn?
15-3 for Nadal but 3-3 in 2014-2016

Djokovic-Wawrinka h2h - 21-5 Djokovic, 4-3 Djokovic since 2014 including 1-3 in Slams and 0-2 in Slam finals

Murray-Wawrinka 8-4 for Murray before 2013, 2-4 since.

 

[Rafa24]

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

Have to admit when I started watching tennis I was Federer only fan, but as time went by I learnt to appreciate Nadal and feel sad sometimes knowing we probably won't get players like Federer and Nadal ever again.

You are in the minority of Fed fans that also like Rafa. Most of them don't want him to win anything. Nadal is my favorite but I like Fed as well. I think it would be great if Nadal would win this one. The top two players ever having resurgent years and each winning 1 of the first 2 slams of the year. And I agree there won't be a time in tennis like this again where 3 guys(djoker) battle each other all in the same era and win 12+ slams each.

 

[Krish872007]

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

No.

 

[Rafa24]

Do some people never learn?
15-3 for Nadal but 3-3 in 2014-2016

Djokovic-Wawrinka h2h - 21-5 Djokovic, 4-3 Djokovic since 2014 including 1-3 in Slams and 0-2 in Slam finals

Murray-Wawrinka 8-4 for Murray before 2013, 2-4 since.

2 of the 3 wins were in 2015 when nadal was playing abysmal. Other loss was AO final where nadal was obviously hurt.

But I agree this isn't the same stan from before 2014 and on the other hand this isn't the same Rafa from 2015-2016. Not even close for Rafa. Should be a great match!

 

[Bartelby]

Match-ups are mainly about history, but surely we are interested here in current affairs if we are talking about the FO?

 

[Rafa24]

No.

What percent of Fed fans do you think want Rafa to win tomorrow? 10%?

 

[Rafa24]

Match-ups are mainly about history, but surely we are interested here in current affairs if we are talking about the FO?

Like I said in another thread it took Stan 5 sets to beat Murray who has been awful this year. Nadal thrashed Thiem who has been one of the top clay players this season. All signs point to a Nadal win but nothing can be taken for granted in slam finals.

 

[Krish872007]

What percent of Fed fans do you think want Rafa to win tomorrow? 10%?

I don't know how many of them there are on this board, so it's tough for me to deal in percentages. I can see around 10 users being genuinely happy with a Rafa win I guess.
I'm pretty sure I'm one of very few that genuinely like all 4 though

 

[swizzy]

love both guys.. when they played each other i was never anxious because one of my guys was going to win and the other would come in second. and i was rewarded with the best tennis matches i have ever seen

 

[BeatlesFan]

Tere will be amazing shots and winners by Wawrinka in the final tomorrow and it really is a case of the all out attacker vs the relentless defender.

Stan has never been and will never be an "all out attacker." He never even ventures near the net unless it's to retrieve a drop shot. He's a complete and 100% baseliner with no propensity to even attack off a second serve. An all out attacker were guys like McEnroe, Rafter or Sampras. Guys with all court games who attempted to end the point ASAP. Stan attacks on occasion, never as a game plan.

 

[BeatlesFan]

What percent of Fed fans do you think want Rafa to win tomorrow? 10%?

Let's ask you the same type of question:

What percentage of Nadal fans would root for Federer in a Fed-Wawrinka Wimbledon final next month?

1%?

I would guess .02%, but why argue a stray .08%?

 

[Gary Duane]

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

No. But we are an endangered species.

 

[Jaitock1991]

Do some people never learn?
15-3 for Nadal but 3-3 in 2014-2016

Djokovic-Wawrinka h2h - 21-5 Djokovic, 4-3 Djokovic since 2014 including 1-3 in Slams and 0-2 in Slam finals

Murray-Wawrinka 8-4 for Murray before 2013, 2-4 since.

Exactly. Wawrinka before and after 2014ish(or after he started working with Norman) are two completely different players.

 

[REKX]

Stan has never been and will never be an "all out attacker." He never even ventures near the net unless it's to retrieve a drop shot. He's a complete and 100% baseliner with no propensity to even attack off a second serve. An all out attacker were guys like McEnroe, Rafter or Sampras. Guys with all court games who attempted to end the point ASAP. Stan attacks on occasion, never as a game plan.

So in your mind attacking only means serve and volley... right. Why can't you be an attacking baseline player?

Federer is not a serve and volley player, certainly not when he was dominating, yet he is regarded as attacking. Do you not understand this? A player can attack from the baseline, by playing aggressive shots, taking the ball early, going for the line, going for winners.

 

[Rattler]

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

Have to admit when I started watching tennis I was Federer only fan, but as time went by I learnt to appreciate Nadal and feel sad sometimes knowing we probably won't get players like Federer and Nadal ever again.

Hell no, like them both.

I think Stan will have a hard time with Nadal;
-the temp is supposed to be hot for the final
-Nadal's strokes will have that extra bit of jump on them
-according to Stan himself, Nadal is difficult to beat when he's playing badly, and I think it's safe to say he's been playing really well this year so far. His clay court season has been pretty incredible this year, although he has one loss.
-Nadal at Roland Garros in the finals, looking for his 10th title? He's gonna be super motivated, a champion who know his opportunities are limited is a dangerous player. A daunting task for Stan to beat him in the final.

Now Stan has more than a few pluses on his side. He absolutely crushed the ball off both wings. If he can get on top of the point before Nadal breaks the court open. Stan has shown he'a comfortable making in match adjustments, especially in big matches...he's never lost a major final.
How much does he have left in the gas tank? That's the question.


I think it's going to be a compelling match.

I'll go with Nadal in 4 sets, but I'm hoping for

 

[Deleted member 735320]

15-3 in Nadals favour.

Pretty one sided match up.

They have split the last 6. If Stan is on he can win. Rafa is a great player but he is not divine. Just like he can draw on the 9 finals he won he also has matches that he's lost over the last three years like Fognini after being up 2 sets to zero; It's out of our hands let the match be played

 

[Chanwan]

Like I said in another thread it took Stan 5 sets to beat Murray who has been awful this year. Nadal thrashed Thiem who has been one of the top clay players this season. All signs point to a Nadal win but nothing can be taken for granted in slam finals.

Yet Murray competed much much better than Thiem in the semis. Go figure

 

[Rafa24]

Yet Murray competed much much better than Thiem in the semis. Go figure

What does that mean? Murray played Stan who has had a mediocre year. Rafa dismantled Thiem who has been the second best on clay this year.

I guess we will find out tomorrow what it all means really. Or actually not. Thiem beat Rafa in Rome and then he got pummeled by Djoker. Fast forward to RG he pummeled Djoker and Nadal stomped him into the clay. Every day is a different day but Rafas been the best on clay this year and had a solid HC season whereas Murray and Wawa)especially muzard) have had mediocre years.

 

[Rafa24]

Let's ask you the same type of question:

What percentage of Nadal fans would root for Federer in a Fed-Wawrinka Wimbledon final next month?

1%?

I would guess .02%, but why argue a stray .08%?

I'll root for Fed because I'm not worried about the slam count. Rafa isn't getting 18. But it's a tough one because I like Stan. Fed fans in the other threads were saying they wanted anyone but Rafa to win RG.

 

[Deleted member 751575]

Not a surprise, you don't want Rafa getting closer to Feds 18. Sad that fed fans are so salty like that. I hated seeing Rafa lose the AO but was happy for fed.

What percent of Fed fans do you think want Rafa to win tomorrow? 10%?

I can't speak in behalf of the users here 'cause I'm relatively new, but on twitter (where I spend most of my time) there's a huge Fedal community which supports both players indistinctly, pretty much every Fedfan I've met supports Rafa except when he's playing against Roger or a very particular fave of each fan. Can't say the same about Nadal fans, though...

On facebook (where I also spend a lot of time) and youtube the rivalry is stronger. It's difficult to find fans who support Nadal and Federer at the same time, but those who are more defensive, disrespectful and kinda rude in their comments are Rafa fans, especially those who speak Spanish (both Spanish people and Latin Americans), they're insufferable and only surpassed by the 'Rena army

But this is just my view according to what I've seen/experienced. Fed fans on other social media seem more chill and relaxed, Rafa fans are way too passionate.

 

[Rafa24]

I can't speak in behalf of the users here 'cause I'm relatively new, but on twitter (where I spend most of my time) there's a huge Fedal community which supports both players indistinctly, pretty much every Fedfan I've met supports Rafa except when he's playing against Roger or a very particular fave of each fan. Can't say the same about Nadal fans, though...

On facebook (where I also spend a lot of time) and youtube the rivalry is stronger. It's difficult to find fans who support Nadal and Federer at the same time, but those who are more defensive, disrespectful and kinda rude in their comments are Rafa fans, especially those who speak Spanish (both Spanish people and Latin Americans), they're insufferable and only surpassed by the 'Rena army

But this is just my view according to what I've seen/experienced. Fed fans on other social media seem more chill and relaxed, Rafa fans are way too passionate.

I've experienced the opposite on facebook and don't see many Rafa fans wanting Fed to lose because he is the all time slam leader. I don't do twitter really.

 

[abmk]

What does that mean? Murray played Stan who has had a mediocre year. Rafa dismantled Thiem who has been the second best on clay this year.

I guess we will find out tomorrow what it all means really. Or actually not. Thiem beat Rafa in Rome and then he got pummeled by Djoker. Fast forward to RG he pummeled Djoker and Nadal stomped him into the clay. Every day is a different day but Rafas been the best on clay this year and had a solid HC season whereas Murray and Wawa)especially muzard) have had mediocre years.

Murray played much better than Thiem did >> but then again, you have blinders on.

and stan made the SF of the AO and final of Indian wells. Hardly mediocre on HC.

 

[marc45]

we're talking Oz, but for godsake we're comparing hard to dirt...13 sets played on clay vs. them, 11-2 Rafa

 

[Rafa24]

Murray played much better than Thiem did >> but then again, you have blinders on.

and stan made the SF of the AO and final of Indian wells. Hardly mediocre on HC.

Murray played better throughout the tournament or in his semi? Thiem played better all tournament and then ran into a freight train in the semis. Murray struggled with Nishikori and then went to 5 with stan.

Stanimal lost his first match in Mardrid, second match in Rome, second match in Monte Carlo. Yes he played good in australia and and the best player he beat in route to the final of indian wells was thiem.

Murrays season? Do you want me to list how it has been? lol.


I don't have blinders on. Rafa has been by far the best player on Clay and was second best on HCs this year.


Just because Murray took Stan to 5 sets doesn't mean he was playing better than Thiem...... We shall find out tomorrow.

 

[Newcomer]

2 of the 3 wins were in 2015 when nadal was playing abysmal. Other loss was AO final where nadal was obviously hurt.

But I agree this isn't the same stan from before 2014 and on the other hand this isn't the same Rafa from 2015-2016. Not even close for Rafa. Should be a great match!

Paris 2015 was a HUGE choke from Nadal. Had 3 setpoints in every set, had a lot of chances to win, but lost both. To be honest, this is the match which makes me nervous now. Nadal can't let himself do this here.

 

[TMF]

Not a surprise, you don't want Rafa getting closer to Feds 18. Sad that fed fans are so salty like that. I hated seeing Rafa lose the AO but was happy for fed.

Perhaps he's a big Wawrinka fan and wants him to win just like you want Rafa to win. Are you insinuating that Wawrinka has no fans out there?

 

[wim2015]

I'll root for Fed because I'm not worried about the slam count. Rafa isn't getting 18. But it's a tough one because I like Stan. Fed fans in the other threads were saying they wanted anyone but Rafa to win RG.

I actually hope Nadal lose today so he could achieve all slam runner-up just like Fed did. As a compensation, I expect Nadal to win USO17, which should not be a surprise considering his current form. What's more, an extra USO instead of RG will make his trophy tally more balanced.

 

[abmk]

Murray played better throughout the tournament or in his semi? Thiem played better all tournament and then ran into a freight train in the semis. Murray struggled with Nishikori and then went to 5 with stan.

Stanimal lost his first match in Mardrid, second match in Rome, second match in Monte Carlo. Yes he played good in australia and and the best player he beat in route to the final of indian wells was thiem.

Murrays season? Do you want me to list how it has been? lol.


I don't have blinders on. Rafa has been by far the best player on Clay and was second best on HCs this year.


Just because Murray took Stan to 5 sets doesn't mean he was playing better than Thiem...... We shall find out tomorrow.

in the semi.

thiem just played plain sh*t. rafa played well, but it wasn't necessarily that special a performance from him.

murray OTOH was playing much better at RG compared to other CC events and played well in the semi.

you got blinders on since you don't recognise that thiem played like cr*p in the semi vs nadal, while murray played well vs stan.

however the final goes, it won't change that.

 

[Rafa24]

in the semi.

thiem just played plain sh*t. rafa played well, but it wasn't necessarily that special a performance from him.

murray OTOH was playing much better at RG compared to other CC events and played well in the semi.

you got blinders on since you don't recognise that thiem played like cr*p in the semi vs nadal, while murray played well vs stan.

however the final goes, it won't change that.

Thiem played the type of tennis it takes to beat Rafa at RG(unless you are Novak). High risk, going for broke shots. He wasn't on fire so he lost. Rome he played the exact same way but was making everything.

Say what you want about muzzards semi performance. I didn't think he looked all that great. Stan hit a ton of winners along with a ton of unforced errors. Murray was better than he has been all year but he got blitzed in the 5th set. Going away 6-1 in the final set isn't impressive.

 

[abmk]

Thiem played the type of tennis it takes to beat Rafa at RG(unless you are Novak). High risk. He wasn't on fire so he lost. Rome he played the exact same way but was making everything.

Say what you want about muzzards semi performance. I didn't think he looked all that great. Stan hit a ton of winners along with a ton of unforced errors. Murray was better than he has been all year but he got blitzed in the 5th set. Going away 6-1 in the final set isn't impressive.

murray wasn't impressive in the 5th, but stan was on-fire. Hence the blitz.

Thiem's intensity wasn't there at all. It was a completely lacklusture performance.
It wasn't about him only missing shots.

 

[Rafa24]

36 winners 36 unforced for muzzard. 1 ace. 5 double faults. 58% first serve. 2nd serve points won 47%. Hardly a brilliant match from Sir Andy.

 

[abmk]

36 winners 36 unforced for muzzard. 1 ace. 5 double faults. 58% first serve. 2nd serve points won 47%. Hardly a brilliant match from Sir Andy.

23 W to 22 UEs for nadal. 2 aces, 2 DFs. 66% first serves in. Not that brilliant either. (only thing remarkable was 76% points won on 2nd serve)
Not a performance that warrants winning by losing only 7 games unless your opponent is playing cr*p.

 

[Gary Duane]

Yet Murray competed much much better than Thiem in the semis. Go figure

Murray was not up against Nadal.

Murray looked sharper because Stan choked the 1st set. He out and out froze, serving for the set at 5/3. Up to that point he had Murray nailed down, and most likely he would have gone over him like a steam-roller for the rest of the match. But after getting broken, serving for the set, he was tight at the end of the TB. I only knew he was going to turn it around because I knew the score.

I knew because I watched the match later, after I had already heard about it. Stan was nervous, which is understandable, but he got tight.

If that happens against Nadal it should be much tougher to come back, as it was for Thiem.

I say that honestly hoping for a nail-biter. I'd love to see it go 5 sets, with one of them finally coming out on top at the very end. That would be epic.

 

[Rafa24]

23 W to 22 UEs for nadal. 2 aces, 2 DFs. 66% first serves in. Not that brilliant either. (only thing remarkable was 76% points won on 2nd serve)
Not a performance that warrants winning by losing only 7 games unless your opponent is playing cr*p.

Rafas second serve points won was 76% and his first serve percentage was 8% higher than Murrays. Thats a huge difference. 66-58 first serves in and second serve points won 76-47. HUGE difference and he will take those serving numbers any day of the week. What killed thiem was not converting break chances. Think he had 8 and converted 1?

 

[abmk]

Rafas second serve points won was 76% and his first serve percentage was 8% higher than Murrays. Thats a huge difference. 66-58 first serves in and second serve points won 76-47. HUGE difference and he will take those serving numbers any day of the week. What killed thiem was not converting break chances. Think he had 8 and converted 1?

Murray goes for more on the 1st serve, rafa lesser. So the 8% difference is not big.
The only huge difference is the 2nd serve points won.

yes, thiem did not do well in converting BPs - again , a function of not enough intensity (on top of rafa saving some of them with clutch play )

 

[Rafa24]

Murray was not up against Nadal.

Murray looked sharper because Stan choked the 1st set. He out and out froze, serving for the set at 5/3. Up to that point he had Murray nailed down, and most likely he would have gone over him like a steam-roller for the rest of the match. But after getting broken, serving for the set, he was tight at the end of the TB. I only knew he was going to turn it around because I knew the score.

I knew because I watched the match later, after I had already heard about it. Stan was nervous, which is understandable, but he got tight.

If that happens against Nadal it should be much tougher to come back, as it was for Thiem.

I say that honestly hoping for a nail-biter. I'd love to see it go 5 sets, with one of them finally coming out on top at the very end. That would be epic.

Thank you. Murray wasn't playing Rafa. Rafa would have dispatched of Sir Andy in straights. I predict stan will put up a good fight tho.

 

[Gary Duane]

Exactly. Wawrinka before and after 2014ish(or after he started working with Norman) are two completely different players.

But Nadal was a different player in 2015, as declined as Wawrinka was improved. Didn't he only lose once to Wawrinka on clay, even then?

I hope I'm wrong. I want to see a competitive match, but I do think it would be more likely to happen on slow HCs.

 

[Rafa24]

But Nadal was a different player in 2015, as declined as Wawrinka was improved. Didn't he only lose once to Wawrinka on clay, even then?

I hope I'm wrong. I want to see a competitive match, but I do think it would be more likely to happen on slow HCs.

2015 is Stans lone win on clay against Rafa. His other 2 wins were indoor hard in paris 2015 and 2014 AO final.

 

[NGM]

I think, and think again, and still can't figure out how should Wawrinka plays Nadal in order to win .

He needs to execute perfectly with low UEs and still it's not enough. On clay Nadal is alien comes from another planet.

 

[zagor]

You are in the minority of Fed fans that also like Rafa. Most of them don't want him to win anything. Nadal is my favorite but I like Fed as well. I think it would be great if Nadal would win this one. The top two players ever having resurgent years and each winning 1 of the first 2 slams of the year. And I agree there won't be a time in tennis like this again where 3 guys(djoker) battle each other all in the same era and win 12+ slams each.

Well first of all it's easier to be a Fedal fan when your primary preference is Nadal (it's almost like Fed fans liking Roddick or Davydenko), Fedal lopsided rivalry has been used to prop up Nadal while at the same time as a stick to bash Fed for years by numerous butthurt groups (who sometimes presented themselves as Nadal fans even if they just hated Fed which further poisoned the well). How many Djokodal fans have you seen around? I'm a longtime member and I can tell you there were dozens of them before 2011 (including the guy who calls him boring Ultron all the time these days), none of them after.

Secondly, unless it's my all-time favourite player I find it hard to root for the old guard anymore against either young players or players who've never won a specific slam, even as big of Fed fan as I am if he say plays Zverev, Kyrgios or even Dimitrov in Wimbledon F/SF I'd be more than a little bit conflicted. So called golden period is all well and nice but it wouldn't hurt to see some new blood break through while those players are still strong (and not after they fall of a cliff or retire).

Thirdly, unless you're a big fan, watching any single player completely destroy the opposition is boring. Yeah, I know that Fed and Novak's dominations were also considered boring by some but they weren't at any point reaching slam finals while losing <30 games. It's not Nadal's fault but so far it has been a snoozefest.

With all this said, I'm pretty neutral for the final (even if I like Stan's game). I do think it will be a historic moment in tennis for Nadal to win 10 titles at a single slam, I won't pop out a champagne to celebrate or anything but it will be an event I'll be glad to have witnessed in my tennis watching years.

 

[Rafa24]

I think, and think again, and still can't figure out how should Wawrinka plays Nadal in order to win .

He needs to execute perfectly with low UEs and still it's not enough. On clay Nadal is alien comes from another planet.

101-2 in BO5 on clay. Hope it is 102-2 here in 12 hours or so!!!

 

[Feather]

Well first of all it's easier to be a Fedal fan when your primary preference is Nadal (it's almost like Fed fans liking Roddick or Davydenko), Fedal lopsided rivalry has been used to prop up Nadal while at the same time as a stick to bash Fed for years by numerous butthurt groups (who sometimes presented themselves as Nadal fans even if they just hated Fed which further poisoned the well). How many Djokodal fans have you seen around? I'm a longtime member and I can tell you there were dozens of them before 2011 (including the guy who calls him boring Ultron all the time these days), none of them after.

Secondly, unless it's my all-time favourite player I find it hard to root for the old guard anymore against either young players or players who've never won a specific slam, even as big of Fed fan as I am if he say plays Zverev, Kyrgios or even Dimitrov in Wimbledon F/SF I'd be more than a little bit conflicted. So called golden period is all well and nice but it wouldn't hurt to see some new blood break through while those players are still strong (and not after they fall of a cliff or retire).

Thirdly, unless you're a big fan, watching any single player completely destroy the opposition is boring. Yeah, I know that Fed and Novak's dominations were also considered boring by some but they weren't at any point reaching slam finals while losing <30 games. It's not Nadal's fault but so far it has been a snoozefest.

With all this said, I'm pretty neutral for the final (even if I like Stan's game). I do think it will be a historic moment in tennis for Nadal to win 10 titles at a single slam, I won't pop out a champagne to celebrate or anything but it will be an event I'll be glad to have witnessed in my tennis watching years.

I am boldly picking Stan in four for this match, Zagor

 

[Gary Duane]

Thank you. Murray wasn't playing Rafa. Rafa would have dispatched of Sir Andy in straights. I predict stan will put up a good fight tho.

I won't predict that. But I hope you are right.

1. Stan has never taken a set off Nadal on clay when Nadal won the first set.
2. Stan's only victory on clay happened in 2015, Nadal's worst year on clay since 2004.
3. Even then he narrowly won the only TB they have ever played on clay in the 1st set and otherwise might not have won that match.
4. Nadal lost on clay 6 times in 2015, a horrible year for him.
5. Nadal's % of games on serve fell to 81% on clay that year, worst ever year for him after 2004.

This is not to say that Stan can't have another miracle final. I'd never bet against the guy. But this is not 2015, so I will be very surprised if Stan wins more than one set, and I believe Nadal will take the match in three sets if he wins the 1st set.