ATP 500: Rotterdam Feb 7-15, 2009

Who Will Win Rotterdam 2009?


  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .

marc45

G.O.A.T.
Rafa: Rotterdam, Dubai, and Barcelona. Monte Carlo can fulfill the fourth 500 requirement. However, Rafa is missing a 500 after the US Open which the ruels also require.
Roger: Dubai, Basel, and Tokyo. Not playing Monte Carlo, so doesn't currently have a fourth 500 planned.

Davis cup points can replace some bad 500 points, but not a 0 that you get for not having four or not having one scheduled after the USO. Currently, it seems Rafa/Roger have a 0 for one of their 500 tournys.
thanks seffina, ace reporting
 

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
Whoa! Nadal needs to go back to three setters. Soon as he has a straight set win in the semis his body breaks down. Imagine what would've happened if he had beaten Verdasco at the Australian in straights. No way he would've won the Australian.

Just joking. Seriously, though, I'm disappointed he lost. I guess the Murray bandwagon will get rolling again. I predict he'll be number 1 in a month. ;)
 

edmondsm

Legend
Most people would not have blamed Nadal if he had retired. It's pretty hard to not be a fan when he shows such sportsmanship and fight. I'm sure at some point he knew he wasn't going to win but he still stuck it out. Really makes Djokovic and Henin look completely pathetic.
 

jaggy

Talk Tennis Guru
Of the top 4 , Murray is my fav to win on head-to-heads, he just needs to get there in the slams.
 
Most people would not have blamed Nadal if he had retired. It's pretty hard to not be a fan when he shows such sportsmanship and fight. I'm sure at some point he knew he wasn't going to win but he still stuck it out. Really makes Djokovic and Henin look completely pathetic.
No it doesn't. It just makes Nadal look stupid. But then I was never impressed by his inability to learn a couple of sentences of English in six years of playing tennis among English speaking people. No?
 

edmondsm

Legend
No it doesn't. It just makes Nadal look stupid. But then I was never impressed by his inability to learn a couple of sentences of English in six years of playing tennis among English speaking people. No?

I think it does. Djokovic can't gut out a little heat or a sore throat? Henin retires in a grand slam final because of a stomach ache!!!

Yet Nadal hangs in their and finishes even though the sensible thing would be to retire. He deserves some credit for that.

I agree though that Nadal's crappy English is annoying. But who knows how much you get exposed too growing up on the island.
 

P_Agony

Banned
Hmm... three straight wins for Murray over Rafa on hard courts. I think Murray owns Rafa on HC onw just like he owns Fed.
 

ruerooo

Legend
No it doesn't. It just makes Nadal look stupid. But then I was never impressed by his inability to learn a couple of sentences of English in six years of playing tennis among English speaking people. No?

Aaaand more tacky bigoted xenophobia from you. And you too, edmondsm.

How much Castilian, Catalán, Mallorquín, and Italian do either of YOU speak?
 
Last edited:

edmondsm

Legend
Hmm... three straight wins for Murray over Rafa on hard courts. I think Murray owns Rafa on HC onw just like he owns Fed.

Murray needs to turn that ownage into some GS tennis. It's great that he is winning, but it's like Andre said. You can be winning every match in the world but if you lose in a GS final you feel like the smallest person on earth.
 

SoBad

G.O.A.T.
I guess congratulations to Murray, although I don't like him anymore. I thought success over the past couple of years would have helped him calm down, but he is just getting more rude and unpleasant it seems. No slam for you.
 

aldeayeah

G.O.A.T.
Our public education in Spain is pretty horrible in that regard; most people speak a horrible English, or no English at all.

Nadal reflecting on the match (translated from http://www.as.com/tenis/articulo/nadal-murray-simplemente-jugo-mejor/dasten/20090215dasdasten_7/Tes )

The Spanish player Rafael Nadal, who lost in three sets (6-3, 4-6 y 6-0) the final of the Rotterdam tourney against the Scot Andy Murray, assured that in spite of the problems he had in his right knee, the match went to Murray's side because "he simply played better", and that he "couldn't do more".

Nadal, who last year suffered an injury in his right knee which stopped him from playing the final stage of the season, didn't give too much importance to the pains that handicapped his game during the match. "I don't think this injury is a serious problem; in any case, I'm sure it's not the same injury of last year", declared the World no. 1.

In addition, the Spaniard analyzed his shape towards the upcoming competitions, among them, the Davis Cup rubber that Spain will play against Serbia on March 6, 7 and 8. "Now I have one week off before playing Dubai, and I expect not to have any problems; after all, I've had a great week in a big tournament, with some good moments in the matches against Bolelli and Tsonga", he commented.

After the second set, the Manacor-born seemed to have doubts about whether to keep on playing, but those doubts were dissipated by saying that it wasn't a "good way" to conclude the Rotterdam tourney. "It was an option to end the match, but that's not a good way to conclude a final; not for me, not for Murray and not for the audience", he said.
 

edmondsm

Legend
Our public education in Spain is pretty horrible in that regard; most people speak a horrible English, or no English at all.

Well you can't say the US is any better. It is next to impossible to develop a second language in the our public education system.
 

ruerooo

Legend
Our public education in Spain is pretty horrible in that regard; most people speak a horrible English, or no English at all.
*sigh*
Everyone that I've ever met from Spain -- especially from Palma, on the same island Rafa is from -- spoke much better English than I speak Spanish. And it's my third language.

At any rate, thank you for the translation. Good of Rafa to think of Andy and the fans. I think he might have retired if it hadn't been the final.

I just hope he is 100% for Dubai and the March tournaments.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
I hope he's ok. I said it at the start of the tournament it would be better to just tank it and save yourself for tournaments that are actually important. And look what happens. Yeah he proves himself by beating a bunch of guys in tough three setters and then you hurt yourself. Makes no sense whatsoever. Is he actually going to play Dubai? He made it sound like it. Just doesn't make sense.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Kudos to Rafa for finishing the match. Too bad the tournament had to end that way. Didn't Murray hurt his ankle too? It seems to me that surface is terrible. (And I don't think you could accuse Murray of overplaying!)
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
Kudos to Rafa for finishing the match. Too bad the tournament had to end that way. Didn't Murray hurt his ankle too? It seems to me that surface is terrible. (And I don't think you could accuse Murray of overplaying!)

Yeah, HC's are pretty much atrocious. Look at how many guys go down with injuries, everyone is taped up etc.

I've said it before but it needs to be repeated until everyone understands it. Hard courts are the only surface that punish you for being a good athlete. If you can run, play good defense and play a high percentage game you are punished for it. This does not make any sense for a pro sport. Hard courts promote ball bashing which is why it's the "best surface" for guys like Blake, Roddick, Tsonga, among a bunch of others. It diminishes the need to be an athlete and elevates those who are "big hitters." Why do people think Federer lost so much on HC last year? Because it allowed guys who go for it to take him out, but when wimby and the clay season come back he still did far better in those tournaments. There is a reason for that...

Tennis should only be played on natural surfaces and should therefore only reward the best athletes in the sport, i.e. Nadal, Federer etc.
 

edmondsm

Legend
He really played down any long-term concerns over this injury in those statements. Hopefully he wasn't just trying to throw credit to Murray. He said he was a go for Dubai, we'll see. I think he maybe shouldn't play. I don't know though, tough call.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Prefer Nadal to Murray. Why is nobody starting to talk about Nadal having problems with Murray? If he wins today, thats three straight wins against Rafa.

EDIT: People can't use the injury as an excuse. Murray is injured too. Nadal is a far better player than Murray, but he just has problems with him.
Since when do people count exhibitions? In competition, this is the 2nd win for Murray vs Nadal. Nadal is now leading their head to head 5-2.
 

Nadal_Freak

Banned
Yeah, HC's are pretty much atrocious. Look at how many guys go down with injuries, everyone is taped up etc.

I've said it before but it needs to be repeated until everyone understands it. Hard courts are the only surface that punish you for being a good athlete. If you can run, play good defense and play a high percentage game you are punished for it. This does not make any sense for a pro sport. Hard courts promote ball bashing which is why it's the "best surface" for guys like Blake, Roddick, Tsonga, among a bunch of others. It diminishes the need to be an athlete and elevates those who are "big hitters." Why do people think Federer lost so much on HC last year? Because it allowed guys who go for it to take him out, but when wimby and the clay season come back he still did far better in those tournaments. There is a reason for that...

Tennis should only be played on natural surfaces and should therefore only reward the best athletes in the sport, i.e. Nadal, Federer etc.
Agreed. Nadal should've skipped Rotterdam though.
 

edmondsm

Legend
Yeah, HC's are pretty much atrocious. Look at how many guys go down with injuries, everyone is taped up etc.

I've said it before but it needs to be repeated until everyone understands it. Hard courts are the only surface that punish you for being a good athlete. If you can run, play good defense and play a high percentage game you are punished for it. This does not make any sense for a pro sport. Hard courts promote ball bashing which is why it's the "best surface" for guys like Blake, Roddick, Tsonga, among a bunch of others. It diminishes the need to be an athlete and elevates those who are "big hitters." Why do people think Federer lost so much on HC last year? Because it allowed guys who go for it to take him out, but when wimby and the clay season come back he still did far better in those tournaments. There is a reason for that...

Tennis should only be played on natural surfaces and should therefore only reward the best athletes in the sport, i.e. Nadal, Federer etc.


You repeat yourself, so I must repeat myself. Hardcourts have certainly not been punishing Federer, Djokovic, and Murray. Their best results have been on this surface, and none of them are showing signs that it is hurting their legs, only Nadal. Federer owes 8 of his GS titles to hardcourts. Djokovic and Murray would have seriously fewer accolades if it weren't for hardcourts. Sure Federer had the one ankle injury way back in 2005 or whenever that was. It has not reoccured. Djokovic and Murray have had no leg issues as far as I know. Actually Roddick and Murray both had upper body injuries on clay-courts. The long rallies on those courts are not good for players who are not used to it. The tennis world does change because one player has issues.

Hardcourts have been the most common surface in the world since Nadal was a little boy. Why didn't he develop a more hardcourt friendly game? Seems like Nadal and the people who oversaw his tennis development are the ones to blame, not the courts.
 
Last edited:

iriraz

Hall of Fame
Even if Nadal is not that badly injured i would find it pretty absurd if he decides to play in Dubai.He will have 2 Masters Events+Davis Cup which are more important then another 500 tourney next month.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
You repeat yourself, so I must repeat myself. Hardcourts have certainly not been punishing Federer, Djokovic, and Murray. Their best results have been on this surface, and none of them are showing signs that it is hurting their legs, only Nadal. Federer owes 8 of his GS titles to hardcourts. Djokovic and Murray would have seriously fewer accolades if it weren't for hardcourts. Sure Federer had the one ankle injury way back in 2005 or whenever that was. It has not reoccured. Djokovic and Murray have had no leg issues as far as I know. Actually Roddick and Murray both had upper body injuries on clay-courts. The long rallies on those courts are not good for players who are not used to it. The tennis world does change because one player has issues.

Hardcourts have been the most common surface in the world since Nadal was a little boy. Why didn't he develop a more hardcourt friendly game? Seems like Nadal and the people who oversaw his tennis development are the ones to blame, not the courts.

Murray was hurt in THIS tournament wasn't he? Federer also busted his ankle in 2005, and frankly he's an anomoly. And Djokovic retires more often than anyone, not to mention the fact that he loses quite a bit.

You're missing the point. The good athletes are punished. Djokovic and Murray are not nearly the athletes that Nadal and Federer are which is why their results on grass and clay are NOWHERE NEAR Nadal and Federer. And Nadal has been winning more on hard court than either of those guys. This is pretty obvious. So Nadal is good everywhere and is therefore punished. See?

Look at all the guys that are taped up and injured. It's not just Nadal. It's just hardest on him because right now he is winning far more than anyone else. If you lose it's not going to take a toll on your body. Go look at Nadal's points breakdown on the ATP tennis site and tell me that is not insane. Yes you can point to Federer as not being injured the same way, but Federer plays a different style, and frankly Federer is a one in a million tennis player so that's just not a good example. Nadal should not be punished because he plays a DIFFERENT style. One based more on movement, tracking balls down, playing good defense AND offense etc. It's just not right. Again, play soccer/football on concrete and watch everyone go down in time. It's the same thing. Tennis is the ONLY pro sport played on solid rock hard concrete.

Something HAS to be done about this at some point. Things have increasingly gone to hard courts for no other reason than cost. They should simply be disallowed on the tour, much like aluminum bats in pro baseball. If you want to keep your athletes healthy just ban them. It's as simple as that. If you like the way HC's play try and develop a body friendly surface that has a similar bounce. Surely it's doable. It has absolutely zero to do with how the surface plays and everything to do with the fact it completely destroys bodies.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Yeah, HC's are pretty much atrocious. Look at how many guys go down with injuries, everyone is taped up etc.

I've said it before but it needs to be repeated until everyone understands it. Hard courts are the only surface that punish you for being a good athlete. If you can run, play good defense and play a high percentage game you are punished for it. This does not make any sense for a pro sport. Hard courts promote ball bashing which is why it's the "best surface" for guys like Blake, Roddick, Tsonga, among a bunch of others. It diminishes the need to be an athlete and elevates those who are "big hitters." Why do people think Federer lost so much on HC last year? Because it allowed guys who go for it to take him out, but when wimby and the clay season come back he still did far better in those tournaments. There is a reason for that...

Tennis should only be played on natural surfaces and should therefore only reward the best athletes in the sport, i.e. Nadal, Federer etc.
Why are there so many hard courts compared to natural surfaces, that's what I would like to know. It's such a shame, ball bashers are so boring! My other question is does anybody else have the feeling that Rotterdam court is worse than other hard courts? Why would that be?
 
Last edited:

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Murray was hurt in THIS tournament wasn't he? Federer also busted his ankle in 2005, and frankly he's an anomoly. And Djokovic retires more often than anyone, not to mention the fact that he loses quite a bit.

You're missing the point. The good athletes are punished. Djokovic and Murray are not nearly the athletes that Nadal and Federer are which is why their results on grass and clay are NOWHERE NEAR Nadal and Federer. And Nadal has been winning more on hard court than either of those guys. This is pretty obvious. So Nadal is good everywhere and is therefore punished. See?

Look at all the guys that are taped up and injured. It's not just Nadal. It's just hardest on him because right now he is winning far more than anyone else. If you lose it's not going to take a toll on your body. Go look at Nadal's points breakdown on the ATP tennis site and tell me that is not insane. Yes you can point to Federer as not being injured the same way, but Federer plays a different style, and frankly Federer is a one in a million tennis player so that's just not a good example. Nadal should not be punished because he plays a DIFFERENT style. One based more on movement, tracking balls down, playing good defense AND offense etc. It's just not right. Again, play soccer/football on concrete and watch everyone go down in time. It's the same thing. Tennis is the ONLY pro sport played on solid rock hard concrete.

Something HAS to be done about this at some point. Things have increasingly gone to hard courts for no other reason than cost. They should simply be disallowed on the tour, much like aluminum bats in pro baseball. If you want to keep your athletes healthy just ban them. It's as simple as that. If you like the way HC's play try and develop a body friendly surface that has a similar bounce. Surely it's doable. It has absolutely zero to do with how the surface plays and everything to do with the fact it completely destroys bodies.

I don't think they should just get rid of hard courts. I'm sure there are many players who would protest that. However, perhaps a shorter hardcourt season like rafa suggested.
 

edberg505

Legend
You repeat yourself, so I must repeat myself. Hardcourts have certainly not been punishing Federer, Djokovic, and Murray. Their best results have been on this surface, and none of them are showing signs that it is hurting their legs, only Nadal. Federer owes 8 of his GS titles to hardcourts. Djokovic and Murray would have seriously fewer accolades if it weren't for hardcourts. Sure Federer had the one ankle injury way back in 2005 or whenever that was. It has not reoccured. Djokovic and Murray have had no leg issues as far as I know. Actually Roddick and Murray both had upper body injuries on clay-courts. The long rallies on those courts are not good for players who are not used to it. The tennis world does change because one player has issues.

Hardcourts have been the most common surface in the world since Nadal was a little boy. Why didn't he develop a more hardcourt friendly game? Seems like Nadal and the people who oversaw his tennis development are the ones to blame, not the courts.

That was not caused by hardcourts.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
I don't think they should just get rid of hard courts. I'm sure there are many players who would protest that. However, perhaps a shorter hardcourt season like rafa suggested.

Shorter would be better for sure. Elimination is best. After playing on every surface out there (aside from indoor carpet I guess) the difference between clay, grass and HC is astounding. I can play for four hours on clay or grass without feeling a thing. Two hours of intense hard court play and I am in pain. I can't imagine what's like for pro players, especially if you're going deep in every single tournament.

Check out Federer's schedule. Look at the predominance of hard court. Remember at one time tennis was ONLY grass, and later still ONLY grass and clay. Look at how bad things are these days.

Federer's schedule.
 

edberg505

Legend
Why are there so many hard courts compared to natural surfaces, that's what I would like to know. It's such a shame, ball bashers are so boring!

Because the money has to come from somewhere to maintain the court surface. And if you think the ratings are low now, just imagine what they would be like here in the states if you see more clay courts.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
That was not caused by hardcourts.

I read he injured it during a practice session. I'm sure he was practicing on hard courts. Is that not accurate? What caused it if it wasn't during play?

Also what is causing his back injury that he has stated he is on pain killers for? Hard courts create a cumulative effect. I'm guessing he wouldn't be having back problems if he was playing solely on natural surfaces.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Shorter would be better for sure. Elimination is best. After playing on every surface out there (aside from indoor carpet I guess) the difference between clay, grass and HC is astounding. I can play for four hours on clay or grass without feeling a thing. Two hours of intense hard court play and I am in pain. I can't imagine what's like for pro players, especially if you're going deep in every single tournament.

Check out Federer's schedule. Look at the predominance of hard court. Remember at one time tennis was ONLY grass, and later still ONLY grass and clay. Look at how bad things are these days.

Federer's schedule.

best for who? The only player I know, atleast recently, who has complained about hardcourts is rafa. I understand your strong dislike for hardcourts, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone has a strong dislike for hardcourts.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
Because the money has to come from somewhere to maintain the court surface. And if you think the ratings are low now, just imagine what they would be like here in the states if you see more clay courts.

That's a load of baloney. The US Open was once played on green clay, which plays faster than red clay.
 

edberg505

Legend
Shorter would be better for sure. Elimination is best. After playing on every surface out there (aside from indoor carpet I guess) the difference between clay, grass and HC is astounding. I can play for four hours on clay or grass without feeling a thing. Two hours of intense hard court play and I am in pain. I can't imagine what's like for pro players, especially if you're going deep in every single tournament.

Check out Federer's schedule. Look at the predominance of hard court. Remember at one time tennis was ONLY grass, and later still ONLY grass and clay. Look at how bad things are these days.

Federer's schedule.

I'm 32 years old and I still don't have a problem with playing on hard courts for an extended period of time. If they were to even attempt to try and cut hardcourts from the tour you can expect to hear an uproar about that from several top pros.
 

Nadal_Freak

Banned
You repeat yourself, so I must repeat myself. Hardcourts have certainly not been punishing Federer, Djokovic, and Murray. Their best results have been on this surface, and none of them are showing signs that it is hurting their legs, only Nadal. Federer owes 8 of his GS titles to hardcourts. Djokovic and Murray would have seriously fewer accolades if it weren't for hardcourts. Sure Federer had the one ankle injury way back in 2005 or whenever that was. It has not reoccured. Djokovic and Murray have had no leg issues as far as I know. Actually Roddick and Murray both had upper body injuries on clay-courts. The long rallies on those courts are not good for players who are not used to it. The tennis world does change because one player has issues.

Hardcourts have been the most common surface in the world since Nadal was a little boy. Why didn't he develop a more hardcourt friendly game? Seems like Nadal and the people who oversaw his tennis development are the ones to blame, not the courts.
Fed does better on clay then hardcourts these days. Nadal grew up on clay. A fun surface but also the only surface he played on.
 

edmondsm

Legend
I read he injured it during a practice session. I'm sure he was practicing on hard courts. Is that not accurate? What caused it if it wasn't during play?

Also what is causing his back injury that he has stated he is on pain killers for? Hard courts create a cumulative effect. I'm guessing he wouldn't be having back problems if he was playing solely on natural surfaces.

Again, 1+1=3? You are conveniently attributing the few injuries Federer has had to the hardcourts. Do you have any hard evidence to back this up? Even if you did I'm sure Federer is fine with picking up an injury every 2 years or so if it means he gets to play on a surface where he dominates.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
best for who? The only player I know, atleast recently, who has complained about hardcourts is rafa. I understand your strong dislike for hardcourts, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone has a strong dislike for hardcourts.

How closely do you pay attention to tennis and how long have you been watching? Look how many guys are taped up. Look how many guys get injured, or go out of the game early because of injuries.

Seriously, how long have you been watching tennis? It's not about a "dislike" for hard courts, it's about respect for people's bodies and people's health. Have you honestly played hard tennis on a hard court vs. hard tennis on grass or clay?

You can't just say "hey I like hard courts" and have that stand up as a valid reason for why they should exist when you're discussing the longevity of players, and quality of play on the tour. Nadal is complaining about hard courts because he is rightfully claiming they are going to harm his quality of life after he is done. Are people really so cold that they think pro players should sacrifice their lives for....cement tennis courts?
 

edberg505

Legend
I read he injured it during a practice session. I'm sure he was practicing on hard courts. Is that not accurate? What caused it if it wasn't during play?

Also what is causing his back injury that he has stated he is on pain killers for? Hard courts create a cumulative effect. I'm guessing he wouldn't be having back problems if he was playing solely on natural surfaces.

WTF? How can you assume it was during practice on a hardcourt? You are aware that tennis players train without actually hitting a ball on a court right? So now hardcourts cause back injuries? Seriously, where are you getting this stuff from ? The majority of back injuries are caused by long term repetitive use.
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
Again, 1+1=3? You are conveniently attributing the few injuries Federer has had to the hardcourts. Do you have any hard evidence to back this up? Even if you did I'm sure Federer is fine with picking up an injury every 2 years or so if it means he gets to play on a surface where he dominates.

He doesn't dominate on hard courts, he did awful on hard courts last year outside of the US Open, where he was about as fortunate as one could be. Did he make it to a single hard court final outside of the US? He doesn't dominate on HC's, the surface allows lesser players to beat you, for the reasons that are plain to anyone who has played on all the surfaces.

No I am not positive that his back and ankle injuries are a direct result of playing on rock hard cement. They could have happened on soft grass and clay as well, but you know...I have my doubts.

Dude have you EVER played on red clay or grass? Be honest here.
 
Top