A Word on Nadal and Wawrinka Matchup

[Gary Duane]

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.

Best plan for Stan:

Bring a cross and a wooden stake...

 

[Rafa24]

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 think tennis fans in general like Djoker less than Fedal. Probably has to do with screaming at ball kids and stuff. Your average tennis fan likes Fed, Nadal and then Djoker. And then of course there are the die hards.

I'm a big fan of Rafa obviously but I just want tomorrow to end with him holding and biting La Coupe des Mousquetaires for the 10th time! I'd rather it be a comfortable win but I will be happy no matter how it happens if he pulls it off!

 

[Rafa24]

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.

I just hope you don't jinx Rafa. All things point to a Rafa win but most were predicting it at the AO against Fed as well. Not favored nearly this heavily though and not at a tournament he has won 9 times.

 

[zagor]

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

Well anything is possible in theory and Stan is a big match player. That said, I don't see it, not on Chatrier in BO5, not with the way Nadal is hitting the ball off both wings, transitioning from defense to offense and serving (ROS is Stan's Achilles heel), Stan would have to be absolutely zoning and taking that BH early for the whole match.

 

[zagor]

I think tennis fans in general like Djoker less than Fedal. Probably has to do with screaming at ball kids and stuff. Your average tennis fan likes Fed, Nadal and then Djoker. And then of course there are the die hards.

None of them are saints and Novak not having any fans is a bit of a myth at this point, millions of social media followers and huge endorsement deals would suggest more people like the guy than it is advertised.

Regardless, my point was that Nadal fans stopped liking him because he started beating Rafa in big matches, not because of other stuff.

I'm a big fan of Rafa obviously but I just want tomorrow to end with him holding and biting La Coupe des Mousquetaires for the 10th time! I'd rather it be a comfortable win but I will be happy no matter how it happens if he pulls it off!

Pretty sure he will be. Stan always has a puncher's chance of course but I think Stanimal's getting tamed this time, some mountains are just impossible to climb.

 

[Feather]

Well anything is possible in theory and Stan is a big match player. That said, I don't see it, not on Chatrier in BO5, not with the way Nadal is hitting the ball off both wings, transitioning from defense to offense and serving (ROS is Stan's Achilles heel), Stan would have to be absolutely zoning and taking that BH early for the whole match.

I know the odds are heavily against and that's why I said I am picking Stan boldly

 

[Gary Duane]

I think tennis fans in general like Djoker less than Fedal. Probably has to do with screaming at ball kids and stuff. Your average tennis fan likes Fed, Nadal and then Djoker. And then of course there are the die hards.

I'm a big fan of Rafa obviously but I just want tomorrow to end with him holding and biting La Coupe des Mousquetaires for the 10th time! I'd rather it be a comfortable win but I will be happy no matter how it happens if he pulls it off!

I think Nadal is pretty neurotic, which I actually like because I am myself.

He's afraid of so many things, and I don't believe the humility is an act. I also think he's a pretty sensitive guy. He thinks about things. I also like that he is probably agnostic, not a "true believer". I like people who question things.

I don't know what to make of Novak. Fans are incredibly fickle and superficial about what they like, so I figure a lot of the dislike for him is not about his tennis.

Federer to me is kind of a simple person. Things are simple FOR him. He's always been a winner, he's always had fan support, and he probably is pretty much what he seems. But I don't think I'd much enjoy talking about life with him, because when people are that successful, they don't have to think about things deeply. Things just happen. So I probably like him the least, as a person, but I do love his tennis...

If anyone has a had a charmed life, it seems to be RF...

 

[zagor]

I know the odds are heavily against and that's why I said I am picking Stan boldly

Well, kudos if you get it right this time. I know you have good instincts when it comes to big matches so maybe you're seeing something I'm not.

 

[Gary Duane]

Regardless, my point was that Nadal fans stopped liking him because he started beating Rafa in big matches, not because of other stuff.

I don't think it has much to do with Nadal losing. Fans are fickle and like to back a winner. But they gravitate towards people who have the right image for them. If you have one champion who is very good-looking in a stereotypical way, and another who is not, fans will latch on to perceived image. Look at Borg - he was blond, long hair, and he had the right image. In fact, no one knew anything about him, and his whole rep was built on a myth. We only got to find out things about Borg later in his life, and some of them were not very pretty.

Young Rafa had huge appeal because he was marketable, on top of winning. He had the long hair, the pirate look, and he was a perfect foil for Federer. If he had been equally talented but looked like Stapanek, same winning ways and same style of play, he probably would have been hated.

That's just about people being impressed by looks/image.

Novak does not have the right image for the US, and maybe to some extent (but less so) in Western Europe. Maybe some of his behaviors have prejudiced fans against him a bit, but I think it's mostly about image and marketing.

I think his lack of popularity is more about image than anything else, which is really superficial and shallow, but that's the way the world works.

 

[Chanwan]

I don't think it has much to do with Nadal losing. Fans are fickle and like to back a winner. But they gravitate towards people who have the right image for them. If you have one champion who is very good-looking in a stereotypical way, and another who is not, fans will latch on to perceived image. Look at Borg - he was blond, long hair, and he had the right image. In fact, no one knew anything about him, and his whole rep was built on a myth. We only got to find out things about Borg later in his life, and some of them were not very pretty.

Young Rafa had huge appeal because he was marketable, on top of winning. He had the long hair, the pirate look, and he was a perfect foil for Federer. If he had been equally talented but looked like Stapanek, same winning ways and same style of play, he probably would have been hated.

That's just about people being impressed by looks/image.

Novak does not have the right image for the US, and maybe to some extent (but less so) in Western Europe. Maybe some of his behaviors have prejudiced fans against him a bit, but I think it's mostly about image and marketing.

I think his lack of popularity is more about image than anything else, which is really superficial and shallow, but that's the way the world works.

You guys still don't get zagor's point.
1. Prior to 2011 many Rafa fans liked Novak. Post 2011 they are few and far between.
2. It's easier to like Fedal as a package if your preference is Rafa as he's done most of the winning in their match up. Just like it's easy as a Fed fan to like Roddick *
*overstating it a bit but the point is valid
@rafa_24

 

[Chanwan]

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.

Ambk said it already. It means Thiem, regardless of clay form, played a sh*tty match and said so himself. While Muzz played reasonably well.

And yes it's easier to play well vs Stan than Rafa on clay but the point is still true
@Gary Duane

 

[Gary Duane]

You guys still don't get zagor's point.
1. Prior to 2011 many Rafa fans liked Novak. Post 2011 they are few and far between.

Well, you might be right. I never thought about it that way, to be honest. That kind of thinking is alien to me. It's the whole fan thing, the total identification with a hero. I never had that.

2. It's easier to like Fedal as a package if your preference is Rafa as he's done most of the winning in their match up. Just like it's easy as a Fed fan to like Roddick *
*overstating it a bit but the point is valid
@rafa_24

I'm not so sure about that. It seems to me that there is plenty of hate on both sides, and I got some of it from both sides when I first started posting here. It took me a few months to figure it out. It was like I had to be a fan of one or the other, and liking the way both of them played was not OK.

If a player has a style of tennis that appeals to me, I'm immediately on board. Unfortunately I don't get very excited about most of the players who are capable of winning big tournaments because I don't like their game style, and the guys I really enjoy watching when they win simply don't win very often. It's really weird because long ago I preferred Borg to everyone else, but today the MOST aggressive players probably come to the net about as often as Borg did, due to the total change in the game itself.

I remember Chris Evert as being the ultimate baseliner, the woman who only came to the net to shake hands, but when I look at her old matches is seems like she approached way more than modern women.

 

[NGM]

I have to say, even result of the match is NID, Wawrinka is still the best candidate to challenge Nadal. We know Murray will collapse under pressure and as good as he is, Murray lacks weapons to hurt Nadal.

So, the final is really the match between two best clay courters this year and a win for Nadal shows that he is fully deserved. Hats off to the best player on clay ever.

 

[merwy]

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%?

You're right but Fed fans have a closer affinity to Wawrinka than Nadal fans do. A better comparison would be a Federer - Ferrer or Verdasco match.

Also Wawrinka just plays more exciting tennis than Nadal. As a neutral spectator I would also start rooting for Stan just because of how he plays.

 

[Gary Duane]

Ambk said it already. It means Thiem, regardless of clay form, played a sh*tty match and said so himself. While Muzz played reasonably well.

And yes it's easier to play well vs Stan than Rafa on clay but the point is still true
@Gary Duane

You might be right, but I still don't like comparing two players playing two different players. Stan was vulnerable that day, and Nadal was not, that day.

It is a legitimate problem when a player plays brilliantly one day and then fades the next, so sooner or later Thiem (and all improving players) have to overcome that problem. It's the only way to win a major and even a M1000, only one match less.

 

[Chanwan]

You might be right, but I still don't like comparing two players playing two different players. Stan was vulnerable that day, and Nadal was not, that day.

It is a legitimate problem when a player plays brilliantly one day and then fades the next, so sooner or later Thiem (and all improving players) have to overcome that problem. It's the only way to win a major and even a M1000, only one match less.

You're partly right. Wouldn't you say Rafa was a bit vulnerable too for a set and a half HAD Thiem managed to execute better? He faced 7 BPs in this time frame

And yes, it's difficult bordering on impossible to do this comparison

 

[zagor]

You guys still don't get zagor's point.
1. Prior to 2011 many Rafa fans liked Novak. Post 2011 they are few and far between.
2. It's easier to like Fedal as a package if your preference is Rafa as he's done most of the winning in their match up. Just like it's easy as a Fed fan to like Roddick *
*overstating it a bit but the point is valid
@rafa_24

Yup, this (though I do agree with Gary's point regarding marketing image).

Let me put it this way, if Fed gets a few more big wins against Nadal this year without the latter returning the favour I can near guarantee you it's gonna further reduce the Fedal population. When push comes to shove most people will still have clear preferences when it comes to the big three, it's just the way it is.

Of course internet forums like this one don't help because whenever stars play a big match the winning side will glorify the win while the losing side will tear it down and downplay it thus contributing to the animosity, entrenching and tribal mentality. Internet on occassion does bring out the worst in people.

 

[Chanwan]

Yup, this (though I do agree with Gary's point regarding marketing image).

Let me put it this way, if Fed gets a few more big wins against Nadal this year without the latter returning the favour I can near guarantee you it's gonna further reduce the Fedal population. When push comes to shove most people will still have clear preferences when it comes to the big three, it's just the way it is.

Of course internet forums like this one don't help because whenever stars play a big match the winning side will glorify the win while the losing side will tear it down and downplay it thus contributing to the animosity, entrenching and tribal mentality. Internet on occassion does bring out the worst in people.

Agreed

 

[Gazelle]

Am I the only one likes Nadal and Federer?

Yes

 

[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.

LOL! Looks like Stan got exposed by RAFA! The Murray wawa semi was 2 players who aren't even close to Nadals level at the moment. Straight sets BEAT DOWN for an entire tournament!

 

[abmk]

LOL! Looks like Stan got exposed by RAFA! The Murray wawa semi was 2 players who aren't even close to Nadals level at the moment. Straight sets BEAT DOWN for an entire tournament!

well, rafa was too good in the final, considerably better than the semi vs thiem. So yeah , we got the result that we got today.

and like I said before,however the final goes, it won't change that thiem played mediocre in the semi.

 

[Rafa24]

well, rafa was too good in the final, considerably better than the semi vs thiem. So yeah , we got the result that we got today.

and like I said before,however the final goes, it won't change that thiem played mediocre in the semi.

Rafa made Wawa look just as mediocre as he did Thiem.

 

[abmk]

Rafa made Wawa look just as mediocre as he did Thiem.

he did by playing considerably better than in the semi.
Stan was disappointing though.