As a Federer and Nadal Fan

[Vish13]

Federer shouldn't need to be at his best ever level to beat Nadal on grass. That's what people don't grasp here. Making the excuse that Federer wasn't at his best in 08.
Big deal, he barely sneaked out 07 in 5 sets also. If this great Federer , the grass GOAT, was really as unbelievable as everyone loves to proclaim, then he should still have been rolling over Nadal on grass every year.
You wouldn't have seen Nadal lose a RG final to his nearest rival who had barely won a clay tournament before it.

Completely agree. And thats why no big deal in Nadal winning Wimbledon, especially the 2008 edition

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Can we all agree that 2008 W was actually a moral victory for Federer. Thanks and lol.

 

[REKX]

Federer was a scarred shell of a man in that Wimbledon 2008 final after having lost 3 previous clay meetings leading up. Even still it took Nadal 9-7 in the 5th set to win it against a mentally broken Federer. That second set was telling of how little confidence Federer had. To be up 4-1 and then lose his serve twice. He was playing like crud for most of it. Slices and chips on weak Nadal second serves. LOL

He didn't look scared in 2008 because his shot making was as great as it had ever been, in fact he was playing stronger in 2008 than 2007, he didn't lose a set on the way to the final in 2008, he did in 2007.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

He didn't look scared in 2008 because his shot making was as great as it had ever been, in fact he was playing stronger in 2008 than 2007, he didn't lose a set on the way to the final in 2008, he did in 2007.

Did you know Federer was even stronger in 2017, when he won the tournament without losing a single set, at the age of nearly 36.

 

[REKX]

Did you know Federer was even stronger in 2017, when he won the tournament without losing a single set, at the age of nearly 36.

Yes because I said that was the only criteria of measurement? No.

Shot making, speed, anticipation, etc I thought you knew about tennis?

2008 would have been an amazing year if Nadal wasn't around, he would have won 3 grand slams including Roland Garros and Wimbledon.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Yes because I said that was the only criteria of measurement? No.

Shot making, speed, anticipation, etc I thought you knew about tennis?

2008 would have been an amazing year if Nadal wasn't around, he would have won 3 grand slams including Roland Garros and Wimbledon.

Djokovic was superior to Federer at RG, and had beaten him at AO. He also played Nadal a lot closer, giving RG 2008 in Nadal's absence to a Federer who struggled to get past Monfils in the semis is a big No No. Wimbledon sure, everyone else was weak, but not RG.

You obviously don't know much about tennis either. He beat Hewitt who was severely past his peak and playing his final few years before retirement, hampered by injuries since 06, the same Hewitt people say was part of the weak era, but was beaten by Federer when Hewitt was actually still a legit threat at slams back in 2004 and 2005. And then he beat Safin...remind me exactly what has Safin done on grass ever? It is his worst surface, and that was his biggest run, and he did not look comfortable on it at all. His biggest claim to fame on the surface was beating Djokovic in the second round in 08, a Djokovic was not ready to win big on grass at that point....Then lets look at Nadal's draw, he slaughtered a Murray who played his first ever quarter final in a slam, and he had barely got past Gasquet the round before in five sets...And don't make me remind you who was Nadal's semi final opponent that year.

The draw was super weak at Wimbeldon 08 for both Federer and Nadal. It was hardly surprising they cruised. Put some half decent players in front of them from other years, and you will see a lot of more a struggle.

 

[REKX]

Djokovic was superior to Federer at RG, and had beaten him at AO. He also played Nadal a lot closer, giving RG 2008 in Nadal's absence to a Federer who struggled to get past Monfils in the semis is a big No No. Wimbledon sure, everyone else was weak, but not RG.

You obviously don't know much about tennis either. He beat Hewitt who was severely past his peak and playing his final few years before retirement, hampered by injuries since 06, the same Hewitt people say was part of the weak era, but was beaten by Federer when Hewitt was actually still a legit threat at slams back in 2004 and 2005. And then he beat Safin...remind me exactly what has Safin done on grass ever? It is his worst surface, and that was his biggest run, and he did not look comfortable on it at all. His biggest claim to fame on the surface was beating Djokovic in the second round in 08, a Djokovic was not ready to win big on grass at that point....Then lets look at Nadal's draw, he slaughtered a Murray who played his first ever quarter final in a slam, and he had barely got past Gasquet the round before in five sets...And don't make me remind you who was Nadal's semi final opponent that year.

The draw was super weak at Wimbeldon 08 for both Federer and Nadal. It was hardly surprising they cruised. Put some half decent players in front of them from other years, and you will see a lot of more a struggle.

If you think 2008 was weak, then 2007 was weaker, and 2003-2006 was laughable. Federer beat pigeons to win many of his grand slam titles you are implying.

Please read what you are writing before responding.

 

[zep]

Funny when Federer fans pretend to be Nadal fans as well.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

If you think 2008 was weak, then 2007 was weaker, and 2003-2006 was laughable. Federer beat pigeons to win many of his grand slam titles you are implying.

Please read what you are writing before responding.

While it is obvious you are a fake Federer fan, just in the other thread you didn't even know how old he was when he won, what Federer still calls his most special moment...winning his first Wimbledon title, let me clear a few things up. The fact you are getting so worked up at how I just tore apart you Wimbledon 2008 party with one post and are throwing Federer's other wins at me shows everything. I don't care, yes, Federer beat up on a lot of his pigeons over the years, you think I am going to get upset by that? They all did, Federer beat his pigeons, Nadal beat his pigeons, and Djokovic beat his pigeons. So what? No, I am just exposing your agenda.

2008 was indeed an incredible win for Nadal, no doubt about it, but if you think that most of the sane people who saw that match will accept that that was a peak Federer performance, you are sadly mistaken. Your agenda is clear...Peak Nadal on grass has a higher level than peak Federer on grass.

Federer and Nadal's true peaks have never overlapped, they are from different generations. Yes, their primes have overlapped, but not their peaks. Federer's peak is generally accepted at 04-07 and Nadal's is 08-13 (The reason why Nadal's is longer is because he had periods off with injury). Nadal beat a prime Federer at Wimbledon 08, you won't get many who will disagree with that, but spare us the peak for peak talk or you'll get exposed as easily as I did you.

 

[metsman]

While it is obvious you are a fake Federer fan, just in the other thread you didn't even know how old he was when he won, what Federer still calls his most special moment...winning his first Wimbledon title, let me clear a few things up. The fact you are getting so worked up at how I just tore apart you Wimbledon 2008 party with one post and are throwing Federer's other wins at me shows everything. I don't care, yes, Federer beat up on a lot of his pigeons over the years, you think I am going to get upset by that? They all did, Federer beat his pigeons, Nadal beat his pigeons, and Djokovic beat his pigeons. So what? No, I am just exposing your agenda.

2008 was indeed an incredible win for Nadal, no doubt about it, but if you think that most of the sane people who saw that match will accept that that was a peak Federer performance, you are sadly mistaken. Your agenda is clear...Peak Nadal on grass has a higher level than peak Federer on grass.

Federer and Nadal's true peaks have never overlapped, they are from different generations. Yes, their primes have overlapped, but not their peaks. Federer's peak is generally accepted at 04-07 and Nadal's is 08-13 (The reason why Nadal's is longer is because he had periods off with injury). Nadal beat a prime Federer at Wimbledon 08, you won't get many who will disagree with that, but spare us the peak for peak talk or you'll get exposed as easily as I did you.

For the most part yes, but I think Rome/MC 2006, the 07 clay matches, and Wimby 07 were peak for peak matchups.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

While it is obvious you are a fake Federer fan, just in the other thread you didn't even know how old he was when he won, what Federer still calls his most special moment...winning his first Wimbledon title, let me clear a few things up. The fact you are getting so worked up at how I just tore apart you Wimbledon 2008 party with one post and are throwing Federer's other wins at me shows everything. I don't care, yes, Federer beat up on a lot of his pigeons over the years, you think I am going to get upset by that? They all did, Federer beat his pigeons, Nadal beat his pigeons, and Djokovic beat his pigeons. So what? No, I am just exposing your agenda.

2008 was indeed an incredible win for Nadal, no doubt about it, but if you think that most of the sane people who saw that match will accept that that was a peak Federer performance, you are sadly mistaken. Your agenda is clear...Peak Nadal on grass has a higher level than peak Federer on grass.

Federer and Nadal's true peaks have never overlapped, they are from different generations. Yes, their primes have overlapped, but not their peaks. Federer's peak is generally accepted at 04-07 and Nadal's is 08-13 (The reason why Nadal's is longer is because he had periods off with injury). Nadal beat a prime Federer at Wimbledon 08, you won't get many who will disagree with that, but spare us the peak for peak talk or you'll get exposed as easily as I did you.

What I don't understand is why people like this don't wear the avatar that I have handcrafted for them.

Eliminates confusion.

 

[ABCD]

I have to slightly disagree with my friend Hitman. In my opinion, the highest level of tennis overall Federer played is from 2015 to now. I also think that, overall, Djokovic played his best in 2015/16 while Nadal is scattered from 2011 to now. This is my subjective opinion not based on their achievements, but based on their performances and technique. In my book, Federer is now 10 times player he was in (lets say) 2005; his backhand is infinitely better as well as his anticipation. I think the same for Nadal; I believe that NadalW2018 would destroy NadalW2008. For me, Djokovic is now more clever than in 2011.

 

[Devin]

I have to slightly disagree with my friend Hitman. In my opinion, the highest level of tennis overall Federer played is from 2015 to now. I also think that, overall, Djokovic played his best in 2015/16 while Nadal is scattered from 2011 to now. This is my subjective opinion not based on their achievements, but based on their performances and technique. In my book, Federer is now 10 times player he was in (lets say) 2005; his backhand is infinitely better as well as his anticipation. I think the same for Nadal; I believe that NadalW2018 would destroy NadalW2008. For me, Djokovic is now more clever than in 2011.

 

[MLM]

I have to slightly disagree with my friend Hitman. In my opinion, the highest level of tennis overall Federer played is from 2015 to now. I also think that, overall, Djokovic played his best in 2015/16 while Nadal is scattered from 2011 to now. This is my subjective opinion not based on their achievements, but based on their performances and technique. In my book, Federer is now 10 times player he was in (lets say) 2005; his backhand is infinitely better as well as his anticipation. I think the same for Nadal; I believe that NadalW2018 would destroy NadalW2008. For me, Djokovic is now more clever than in 2011.

 

[metsman]

I have to slightly disagree with my friend Hitman. In my opinion, the highest level of tennis overall Federer played is from 2015 to now. I also think that, overall, Djokovic played his best in 2015/16 while Nadal is scattered from 2011 to now. This is my subjective opinion not based on their achievements, but based on their performances and technique. In my book, Federer is now 10 times player he was in (lets say) 2005; his backhand is infinitely better as well as his anticipation. I think the same for Nadal; I believe that NadalW2018 would destroy NadalW2008. For me, Djokovic is now more clever than in 2011.

imagine how badly M. Cecchinato would have massacred 2011 Nole who played like a brainless ball basher?

 

[ABCD]

You can read my posts in 2015 and note my claims that Federer 1) never played better and 2) that he will win more GS in the future. There is only one reason why he did not win 3GS in 2015, i.e. Novak Djokovic. Another indication of his vast improvement is a score against Nadal starting from 2015.

 

[MLM]

imagine how badly M. Cecchinato would have massacred 2011 Nole who played like a brainless ball basher?

6-0, 6-0, 6-0. Djokovic 2011 was a complete mug don’t you know

 

[REKX]

While it is obvious you are a fake Federer fan, just in the other thread you didn't even know how old he was when he won, what Federer still calls his most special moment...winning his first Wimbledon title, let me clear a few things up. The fact you are getting so worked up at how I just tore apart you Wimbledon 2008 party with one post and are throwing Federer's other wins at me shows everything. I don't care, yes, Federer beat up on a lot of his pigeons over the years, you think I am going to get upset by that? They all did, Federer beat his pigeons, Nadal beat his pigeons, and Djokovic beat his pigeons. So what? No, I am just exposing your agenda.

2008 was indeed an incredible win for Nadal, no doubt about it, but if you think that most of the sane people who saw that match will accept that that was a peak Federer performance, you are sadly mistaken. Your agenda is clear...Peak Nadal on grass has a higher level than peak Federer on grass.

Federer and Nadal's true peaks have never overlapped, they are from different generations. Yes, their primes have overlapped, but not their peaks. Federer's peak is generally accepted at 04-07 and Nadal's is 08-13 (The reason why Nadal's is longer is because he had periods off with injury). Nadal beat a prime Federer at Wimbledon 08, you won't get many who will disagree with that, but spare us the peak for peak talk or you'll get exposed as easily as I did you.

No that is not my agenda at all, I am telling you like it is.

I think Federer played better in 2007 overall but not by a huge amount, he was still hitting outrageous winners from anywhere and his footwork and speed were very good in both years. I think Nadal improved a lot from 2007, and not just physically.

It is exactly as all the tennis experts have said it is, Federer was still in his prime at Wimbledon 2008, maybe not his absolute best, but Nadal raised his game to match a very very high level of grass court tennis. For Nadal to match Federer in his prime for two years shows how good his grass court game was back then, and we are talking the greatest grass court player of all time.

In my opinion Federer's best is better than Nadal's best on grass, but Nadal's peak on grass is not far behind because he took Federer to five sets on grass in his complete year in 2007, and beat him in 2008 where he was still in his prime years. The 2012 onwards Federer Nadal matches for me don't prove a lot, Federer's prime was gone by then, and especially now they are both well past their primes it's just good to sit back and watch - doesn't mean a great deal.

 

[REKX]

You can read my posts in 2015 and note my claims that Federer 1) never played better and 2) that he will win more GS in the future. There is only one reason why he did not win 3GS in 2015, i.e. Novak Djokovic. Another indication of his vast improvement is a score against Nadal starting from 2015.

No Federer was not even close to his absolute peak in 2015, it's the field that got weak. Footwork is one of the key aspects of tennis, he is a full step slower than say 2003-2009. Whilst in his prime his footwork allowed him to get into positions and hit winners and passing shots from anywhere. His forehand and backhand and serve are probably comparable to his best, but it's not very effective when you can't get to the shot in time.

 

[ABCD]

No Federer was not even close to his absolute peak in 2015, it's the field that got weak. Footwork is one of the key aspects of tennis, he is a full step slower than say 2003-2009. Whilst in his prime his footwork allowed him to get into positions and hit winners and passing shots from anywhere. His forehand and backhand and serve are probably comparable to his best, but it's not very effective when you can't get to the shot in time.

This was discussed in details in 2015; I have many posts on that subject and detailed responses on many questions you could ask. Show me your measurements of Federer's footwork and (what is the key) his ball anticipation. Prove your statement using numbers and we can discuss. I have >100 published papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals about similar subjects so if you are serious we can discuss.

 

[REKX]

This was discussed in details in 2015; I have many posts on that subject and detailed responses on many questions you could ask. Show me your measurements of Federer's footwork and (what is the key) his ball anticipation. Prove your statement using numbers and we can discuss. I have >100 published papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals about similar subjects so if you are serious we can discuss.

I'm very serious, are you?

Let's start with biology, men are at their physical peak between 25-27, that is the height. Federer after say 2008, maybe 2009, lost his speed and never regained it. And he won't, because biology.

No numbers are needed lol, what science did you major in, because I also studied a science so I would like to know how you become so misguided. Just look at everyone else at age 35, they are retired, the body doesn't get quicker, faster and better at anticipation after 30, it goes down. Again I thought this was common sense.

I think you are just trying to be stupid but sound legitimate, to get reactions like this stating the obvious - well I played, so you got your laugh and let's move on.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

No that is not my agenda at all, I am telling you like it is.

I think Federer played better in 2007 overall but not by a huge amount, he was still hitting outrageous winners from anywhere and his footwork and speed were very good in both years. I think Nadal improved a lot from 2007, and not just physically.

It is exactly as all the tennis experts have said it is, Federer was still in his prime at Wimbledon 2008, maybe not his absolute best, but Nadal raised his game to match a very very high level of grass court tennis. For Nadal to match Federer in his prime for two years shows how good his grass court game was back then, and we are talking the greatest grass court player of all time.

In my opinion Federer's best is better than Nadal's best on grass, but Nadal's peak on grass is not far behind because he took Federer to five sets on grass in his complete year in 2007, and beat him in 2008 where he was still in his prime years. The 2012 onwards Federer Nadal matches for me don't prove a lot, Federer's prime was gone by then, and especially now they are both well past their primes it's just good to sit back and watch - doesn't mean a great deal.

And I am telling you like it is also. And so is everyone else. We know your obvious agenda.

 

[ABCD]

I'm very serious, are you?

Let's start with biology, men are at their physical peak between 25-27, that is the height. Federer after say 2008, maybe 2009, lost his speed and never regained it. And he won't, because biology.

No numbers are needed lol, what science did you major in, because I also studied a science so I would like to know how you become so misguided. Just look at everyone else at age 35, they are retired, the body doesn't get quicker, faster and better at anticipation after 30, it goes down. Again I thought this was common sense.

I think you are just trying to be stupid but sound legitimate, to get reactions like this stating the obvious - well I played, so you got your laugh and let's move on.

I am a physician and scientist (MD, PhD) with expertise in ageing who has published over 100 papers in journals of high basic science and clinical stature. I am an editor of a well-established pharmacology journal. In science you have to be open-minded and nothing is known or common-sense. You have to do your experiments and prove it. Although Federer is not an expert in the field, In 2015 he said something like "I am now better player than in 2005 as I practised 10 years longer"; and this is, in essence, true. This is an example of a work that could be useful to start understanding how Federer could be a better player in 2015 than 2005.

Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 Sep;135(1):17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 May 26.
Action specificity increases anticipatory performance and the expert advantage in natural interceptive tasks.
Mann DL1, Abernethy B, Farrow D.

 

[REKX]

I am a physician and scientist (MD, PhD) with expertise in ageing who has published over 100 papers in journals of high basic science and clinical stature. I am an editor of a well-established pharmacology journal. In science you have to be open-minded and nothing is known or common-sense. You have to do your experiments and prove it. Although Federer is not an expert in the field, In 2015 he said something like "I am now better player than in 2005 as I practised 10 years longer"; and this is, in essence, true. This is an example of a work that could be useful to start understanding how Federer could be a better player in 2015 than 2005.

Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 Sep;135(1):17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 May 26.
Action specificity increases anticipatory performance and the expert advantage in natural interceptive tasks.
Mann DL1, Abernethy B, Farrow D.

So you work is essentially saying an athlete can perform at his physical peak at say 35 better than 25-27. If you are saying that, then your work is wrong. This isn't chess or snooker, it is an athletic sport.

Well my branch of science is mathematics, and we are theory based and proof, objective proof that is.

Speed and footwork accounts for a huge amount in tennis, I don't know if you've ever played the sport, it is an aerobic sport, and that only declines after 28. Again, biology, sure you know this?

If your theory is correct, then Sampras who I know for a fact still hits a good backhand, forehand and a serve which is still better than most in today's tour, why doesn't he come back and clean up?

Unfortunately this is the case with your studies, the science maybe correct but the application is wrong. Essentially you are saying speed is not important in tennis, but anyone who has ever played the sport, from amateurs to the very top pros will tell you speed is incredibly important.

 

[REKX]

I am a physician and scientist (MD, PhD) with expertise in ageing who has published over 100 papers in journals of high basic science and clinical stature. I am an editor of a well-established pharmacology journal. In science you have to be open-minded and nothing is known or common-sense. You have to do your experiments and prove it. Although Federer is not an expert in the field, In 2015 he said something like "I am now better player than in 2005 as I practised 10 years longer"; and this is, in essence, true. This is an example of a work that could be useful to start understanding how Federer could be a better player in 2015 than 2005.

Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 Sep;135(1):17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 May 26.
Action specificity increases anticipatory performance and the expert advantage in natural interceptive tasks.
Mann DL1, Abernethy B, Farrow D.

Also, watch the 2009 Australian Open final, and the 2017 Australian Open final.

2017 almost looks like slow motion because of the levels of performance Federer and Nadal reached at their peak.

Why is the 2017 significantly less in terms of speed and quality? Hmm, I know, speed. I still can't tell if you're trolling or not, so I bit again.

 

[EloQuent]

I am a physician and scientist (MD, PhD) with expertise in ageing who has published over 100 papers in journals of high basic science and clinical stature. I am an editor of a well-established pharmacology journal. In science you have to be open-minded and nothing is known or common-sense. You have to do your experiments and prove it. Although Federer is not an expert in the field, In 2015 he said something like "I am now better player than in 2005 as I practised 10 years longer"; and this is, in essence, true. This is an example of a work that could be useful to start understanding how Federer could be a better player in 2015 than 2005.

Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 Sep;135(1):17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 May 26.
Action specificity increases anticipatory performance and the expert advantage in natural interceptive tasks.
Mann DL1, Abernethy B, Farrow D.

Wouldn't an actual MD PhD know how to spell aging.

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer was a scarred shell of a man in that Wimbledon 2008 final after having lost 3 previous clay meetings leading up. Even still it took Nadal 9-7 in the 5th set to win it against a mentally broken Federer. That second set was telling of how little confidence Federer had. To be up 4-1 and then lose his serve twice. He was playing like crud for most of it. Slices and chips on weak Nadal second serves. LOL

Yep

Imagine 2003-2004 Federer with no mental scars coming out and blitzkrieging Nadal with his FH and all court game?

 

[KINGROGER]

No that is not my agenda at all, I am telling you like it is.

I think Federer played better in 2007 overall but not by a huge amount, he was still hitting outrageous winners from anywhere and his footwork and speed were very good in both years. I think Nadal improved a lot from 2007, and not just physically.

It is exactly as all the tennis experts have said it is, Federer was still in his prime at Wimbledon 2008, maybe not his absolute best, but Nadal raised his game to match a very very high level of grass court tennis. For Nadal to match Federer in his prime for two years shows how good his grass court game was back then, and we are talking the greatest grass court player of all time.

In my opinion Federer's best is better than Nadal's best on grass, but Nadal's peak on grass is not far behind because he took Federer to five sets on grass in his complete year in 2007, and beat him in 2008 where he was still in his prime years. The 2012 onwards Federer Nadal matches for me don't prove a lot, Federer's prime was gone by then, and especially now they are both well past their primes it's just good to sit back and watch - doesn't mean a great deal.

Did you watch the 2008 final and see how many tentative returns Federer was chipping into the net? How many weak FHs he was playing? He played like a man mentally scarred from the 2008 clay beatings/HUGE Hamburg choke.

Even 2007 was a step below 2004-2006 overall. Less titles, more losses to mugs (Canas x2, Volandri), less wins etc.

 

[ABCD]

Wouldn't an actual MD PhD know how to spell aging.

Also, watch the 2009 Australian Open final, and the 2017 Australian Open final.

2017 almost looks like slow motion because of the levels of performance Federer and Nadal reached at their peak.

Why is the 2017 significantly less in terms of speed and quality? Hmm, I know, speed. I still can't tell if you're trolling or not, so I bit again.

If you want some answers to your questions dig up my discussions in 2015. Have a nice life and all the best.

 

[Deleted member 742196]

As a Nadal fan you have to deal with the fact that if Nadal ever won a set over Federer on hard/grass courts it was actually because Federer was either old/sick/injured/not peak/playing **** etc etc. If not that it's only because Nadal is a lefty and has the matchup advantage. Now with that out of the way why don't we just end all the threads.

As the rookie above is learning, this isn’t exclusively restricted to Nadal fans.

@REKX - some helpful tips:

Tenet number #1
Never insinuate anyone is equal, better or even slightly worse than peak Federer on grass.

Tenet number #2
Especially if that person is Nadal.

 

[kevaninho]

Did you watch the 2008 final and see how many tentative returns Federer was chipping into the net? How many weak FHs he was playing? He played like a man mentally scarred from the 2008 clay beatings/HUGE Hamburg choke.

Even 2007 was a step below 2004-2006 overall. Less titles, more losses to mugs (Canas x2, Volandri), less wins etc.

Shut up, youre making excuses. If Fed had won in 08, his poor performance wouldn't be talked about ( poor according to you ).
He played just fine. Good enough to beat everyone else with ease not named Nadal.
Its a fact Nadal upped his game and took the match from Fed. He wasn't mentally beaten at all. His game was neutralized by Nadal killing his backhand all day long.

 

[metsman]

If you want some answers to your questions dig up my discussions in 2015. Have a nice life and all the best.

only old people spell it like that

 

[KINGROGER]

Shut up, youre making excuses. If Fed had won in 08, his poor performance wouldn't be talked about ( poor according to you ).
He played just fine. Good enough to beat everyone else with ease not named Nadal.
Its a fact Nadal upped his game and took the match from Fed. He wasn't mentally beaten at all. His game was neutralized by Nadal killing his backhand all day long.

What does Nadal have to do with Federer hitting all his shots tentatively for 2 and a half sets? FH lacking power and precision, BH a joke, 2nd serve returns a joke.

Seriously check out some match play from his 03,04,06 runs and compare it to his 08 performance. Night and day.

 

[kevaninho]

What does Nadal have to do with Federer hitting all his shots tentatively for 2 and a half sets? FH lacking power and precision, BH a joke, 2nd serve returns a joke.

Seriously check out some match play from his 03,04,06 runs and compare it to his 08 performance. Night and day.

Maybe because when your opponent is playing out of his skin and making you miss. Howcome you never used 07 to compare?
Maybe its just Nadals game that makes Feds shots seem poor to you. Therefore you seem to magically think that he came out of his prime by 07 onwards because Nadal made him look that way.

 

[KINGROGER]

Maybe because when your opponent is playing out of his skin and making you miss. Howcome you never used 07 to compare?
Maybe its just Nadals game that makes Feds shots seem poor to you. Therefore you seem to magically think that he came out of his prime by 07 onwards because Nadal made him look that way.

07 was slightly below 03-06. Nothing to with Nadal but Fed’s shots weren’t as good. 5th set he showed peak level return and FH though.

Fed was hitting mediocre shots off neutral rally balls. He hit a lot of winners too but his first two sets were far far too tentative. No way does peak Fed blow a 4-1 lead on grass to anyone.

Nadal was same at 08 RG final too pretty much, a little better. Not going from 07 final score line to 6-1, 6-3, 6-0 better.