Dimitrov to beat nadal

N

Nadal2013

Banned
Nadals win over zverev was impressive no doubt.

Monfils and raonic to be blunt handed it to him. Dimitrov just tore apart an in form goffin who us a better returner than nadal.

Dimitrov moves well and this court isnt bouncing high so going affer dinitrov backhand wont work as effectively.

The pressurr on nadal to make it the dream final has often got to him outside of clay. He is still hitting his fh short and nobody has yet to say nadal is llaying great tennis. He is fighting great and is fit but there is a difference.

With federer injured (he wont recober for sunday if news of this abductor injury is ckrrect) the final wouldnt be a dream final anyway. Nadal or dimitrov will win the final.

But for all the romance at this tournament it may well be the tournamwnt that heralds a new era. Dimitrov easily good enough to win a major. This is his best chance as murray and djokovic (still byvfar the best two in the world) are out and they can sufficate the life out of dimitrov something nadal of today cannof and never will be able to do. The nadal of 2008 would have destroyed dimitrov but alas we are in2017.
 
Nadal2013 said:
Nadals win over zverev was impressive no doubt.

Monfils and raonic to be blunt handed it to him. Dimitrov just tore apart an in form goffin who us a better returner than nadal.

Dimitrov moves well and this court isnt bouncing high so going affer dinitrov backhand wont work as effectively.

The pressurr on nadal to make it the dream final has often got to him outside of clay. He is still hitting his fh short and nobody has yet to say nadal is llaying great tennis. He is fighting great and is fit but there is a difference.

With federer injured (he wont recober for sunday if news of this abductor injury is ckrrect) the final wouldnt be a dream final anyway. Nadal or dimitrov will win the final.

But for all the romance at this tournament it may well be the tournamwnt that heralds a new era. Dimitrov easily good enough to win a major. This is his best chance as murray and djokovic (still byvfar the best two in the world) are out and they can sufficate the life out of dimitrov something nadal of today cannof and never will be able to do. The nadal of 2008 would have destroyed dimitrov but alas we are in2017.
Click to expand...
Agree Dimi is good enough to win a major but this really is a bad matchup. this court still takes topspin pretty well albeit fast court. and Dimi backhand really doesn't match up well with any of RAFA's groundies.
 
If Dimi gets one set, it would be surprising. It seems likely he will tamely go down and win about 9 games, total. It's a bad match up-- his BH will just get pummeled all night.
 
They will both be nervous no doubt, but I think Nadal will have the mental edge. Grigor playing very well and his backhand appears to have developed into something he can actually use as a weapon. Neither result would be surprising but the tennis world wants one more Fedal final to put the final nail in the previous era and bring in the fresh, new, weak era without a big 4 and Roanic as the #3 in the world!
 
Betting line:

Federer: 1.63
Nadal: 2.32
Dimitrov: 7.25

Between Dimitrov and Nadal, Dimitrov is 3-1 underdog.
 
BeatlesFan said:
If Dimi gets one set, it would be surprising. It seems likely he will tamely go down and win about 9 games, total. It's a bad match up-- his BH will just get pummeled all night.
Click to expand...
Where do you get this shtick?

A worse version of Dimitrov was playing against a better version of Rafa 3 years ago in the QF (under conditions that favoured him less), and he was more than holding his own.
 
SpinToWin said:
Where do you get this shtick?

A worse version of Dimitrov was playing against a better version of Rafa 3 years ago in the QF (under conditions that favoured him less), and he was more than holding his own.
Click to expand...

No one knows. Even baby Dimitrov in like 2011 would push Nadal to deciding sets on hard court. Only some of their clay matches haven't been competitive. It's actually funny because, before 2015, people said Dimitrov was a bad matchup for Nadal. Now apparently he's a good matchup after both slumped for a couple years. And after Dimitrov just routined Nadal on a similar court in Shanghai.
 
Last edited:
WhiskeyEE said:
No one knows. Even baby Dimitrov in like 2011 would push Nadal to deciding sets on hard court. Only their clay matches haven't been competitive. It's actually funny because, before 2015, people said Dimitrov was a bad matchup for Nadal. Now apparently he's a good matchup after both slumped for a couple years. And after Dimitrov just routined Nadal on a similar court in Shanghai.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's honestly baffling haha

Hope Dimi wins, would be the highest form of poetic justice :D
 
SpinToWin said:
Where do you get this shtick?
Click to expand...

Shtick? Seriously?

Nadal is the mentally strongest player I have ever seen (aside from Borg and Pete). He also has a huge H2H advatange over Dimi and much more experience on the big stage in majors. Nadal has won 14 majors, Dimi's career highlight is making it to one semifinal at Wimbledon. I call the obvious outcome, which will be a thrashing by the vastly superior player: Nadal. It's hardly "shtick," it's rudimentary. God knows I hope Dimi takes 6 hours to beat the beast and limps into the final to bow over for Roger. But that has about a 1% chance of occurring.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Shtick? Seriously?

Nadal is the mentally strongest player I have ever seen (aside from Borg and Pete). He also has a huge H2H advatange over Dimi and much more experience on the big stage in majors. Nadal has won 14 majors, Dimi's career highlight is making it to one semifinal at Wimbledon. I call the obvious outcome, which will be a thrashing by the vastly superior player: Nadal. It's hardly "shtick," it's rudimentary. God knows I hope Dimi takes 6 hours to beat the beast and limps into the final to bow over for Roger. But that has about a 1% chance of occurring.
Click to expand...

For the last 3 years, Nadal has lost to the first in form "inferior player" he faced in every slam. Dimitrov is the first in form player he's facing this AO.

Last 2 years at the AO he lost to Berdych and Verdasco. Got straight setted by Berdych after beating him 20 straight times. He just got luckier with his opponents this year.
 
Grigor is moving very well and he has not had any long matches so he should be rested. Young legs, should be very motivated. His power has looked impressive throughout the tourny and his BH slice has improved. He also seems much more patient and less emotional on big points.

I think he can match if not exceed Nadal's movement, but it'll be really interesting to see how he handles the pressure of this match and how he defends the Nadal high loopy topspin to his backhand.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Shtick? Seriously?

Nadal is the mentally strongest player I have ever seen (aside from Borg and Pete). He also has a huge H2H advatange over Dimi and much more experience on the big stage in majors. Nadal has won 14 majors, Dimi's career highlight is making it to one semifinal at Wimbledon. I call the obvious outcome, which will be a thrashing by the vastly superior player: Nadal. It's hardly "shtick," it's rudimentary. God knows I hope Dimi takes 6 hours to beat the beast and limps into the final to bow over for Roger. But that has about a 1% chance of occurring.
Click to expand...
What @WhiskeyEE said.

By your logic Sampras could come back and would clearly win in a match against Dimi in Wimbledon. Because he's a "mentally strong player in Wimby, and has much more experience on the big stage. He has won 14 majors, of which 7 were at Wimby, while Dimi's career highlight is only making a single semi there. I call the obvious outcome, a thrashing by the superior player."

Form matters, in fact form is the most important thing. Dimi has won their last match, and comes into this match with a winning streak and a title in Brisbane, whereas Rafa lost there in the Quarters. Rafa winning against Pouille at last year's USO had been the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Berdych in last year's AO had been the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Fognini in 2015's USO had been the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Brown in 2015's Wimby had been the obvious outcome. At what point do you start doubting what "the obvious outcome" is?
 
Last edited:
SpinToWin said:
What @WhiskeyEE said.

By your logic Sampras could come back and would clearly win in a match against Dimi in Wimbledon. Because he's a "mentally strong player in Wimby, and has much more experience on the big stage. He has won 14 majors, of which 7 were at Wimby, while Dimi's career highlight is only making a single semi there. I call the obvious outcome, a thrashing by the superior player."

Form matters, in fact form is the most important thing. Dimi has won their last match, and comes into this match with a winning streak and a title in Brisbane, whereas Rafa lost there in the Quarters. Rafa winning against Pouille at last year's USO was the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Berdych in last year's AO had been the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Fognini in 2015's USO had been the obvious outcome. Rafa winning against Brown in 2015's Wimby had been the obvious outcome. At what point do you start doubting what "the obvious outcome" is?
Click to expand...

actually, I don't think brown's win over nadal is quite the same thing since nadal was losing early at Wimbledon for the past few years. He struggled even during his prime during the first week. I mean I'm not saying grigor doesn't have his chances, but I'm sure at that point, many weren't stunned when brown defeated nadal at wimbledon.
 
icedevil0289 said:
actually, I don't think brown's win over nadal is quite the same thing since nadal was losing early at Wimbledon for the past few years. He struggled even during his prime during the first week. I mean I'm not saying grigor doesn't have his chances, but I'm sure at that point, many weren't stunned when brown defeated nadal at wimbledon.
Click to expand...
And the same is the case here in my book, that's sort of the point I'm trying to make. Sure Rafa could win, but it wouldn't be stunning for him to lose, so to speak of an obvious outcome is just not true.
 
BGod said:
Betting line:

Federer: 1.63
Nadal: 2.32
Dimitrov: 7.25

Between Dimitrov and Nadal, Dimitrov is 3-1 underdog.
Click to expand...

What exactly do these figures mean ?
I keep getting pairs of figures on my livestream. What do they mean ?



@Marius_Hancu could you explain the figures ? they are from the livestream you linked
 
WhiskeyEE said:
For the last 3 years, Nadal has lost to the first in form "inferior player" he faced in every slam. Dimitrov is the first in form player he's facing this AO.

Last 2 years at the AO he lost to Berdych and Verdasco. Got straight setted by Berdych after beating him 20 straight times. He just got luckier with his opponents this year.
Click to expand...
Disagree about zverev that was a huge win for nadal.

But monfils and raonic were very poor. One thing though the beijing defeat may concentrate nadals mind
 
Sentinel said:
What exactly do these figures mean ?
I keep getting pairs of figures on my livestream. What do they mean ?



@Marius_Hancu could you explain the figures ? they are from the livestream you linked
Click to expand...

The payout. The bigger the payout the longer the odds. Honestly can't go wrong with Dimitrov 7x payout if he wins.
 
Goffin was simply terrible and it was not because of his opponent, though Grigor played well. Credit to him but with a normal Goffin this match would have been much different.

1st Serve % 47% (44 of 94)
2nd Serve Points Won 38% (19 of 50)
Break Points Won 20% (2 of 10)
Unforced Errors 46

Nadal will be a tough cookie to break. Dimitrov will be lucky to win a set against Rafa.
 
Nadal2013 said:
Disagree about zverev that was a huge win for nadal.

But monfils and raonic were very poor. One thing though the beijing defeat may concentrate nadals mind
Click to expand...

Zverev is 19 years old without the fitness for 5 set matches. Even Nadal used to gas in 5 set matches at that age. Like against Federer Miami 2005.
 
There is no obvious outcome to this match, and many Nadal fans are saying the same with pretty good reason, IMO. It's not just a humble act. Nadal is certainly the favourite, but it's not a slam dunk. Dimitrov is looking better than he has in ages, has pushed Nadal here before, and Nadal's not as reliable as he was in 2008. Nadal will be hard to beat as always, and hopefully Dimitrov doesn't choke (could be a big if), but the keys to an upset are there.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Zverev is 19 years old without the fitness for 5 set matches. Even Nadal used to gas in 5 set matches at that age. Like against Federer Miami 2005.
Click to expand...
Still not many bar murray and djokovic would have beat zverev that day as he was brutally good. Think he would have beat federer due to it being less physical.

Monfils though is not a player u can judge a win againsg him by. And raonic has no backhand and woeful movement and a very predictable serve so as delughted i am to see nadal back playing well im not of the opinion this is old nadal and wont be surprised if he loses to dimitrov.

Even if he wins the whole tournament in my view he still needs to beat djokovic before we can say he is truly back.

The media hype though is insane.
 
Nadal2013 said:
Nadals win over zverev was impressive no doubt.

Monfils and raonic to be blunt handed it to him. Dimitrov just tore apart an in form goffin who us a better returner than nadal.

Dimitrov moves well and this court isnt bouncing high so going affer dinitrov backhand wont work as effectively.

The pressurr on nadal to make it the dream final has often got to him outside of clay. He is still hitting his fh short and nobody has yet to say nadal is llaying great tennis. He is fighting great and is fit but there is a difference.

With federer injured (he wont recober for sunday if news of this abductor injury is ckrrect) the final wouldnt be a dream final anyway. Nadal or dimitrov will win the final.

But for all the romance at this tournament it may well be the tournamwnt that heralds a new era. Dimitrov easily good enough to win a major. This is his best chance as murray and djokovic (still byvfar the best two in the world) are out and they can sufficate the life out of dimitrov something nadal of today cannof and never will be able to do. The nadal of 2008 would have destroyed dimitrov but alas we are in2017.
Click to expand...

You seem to forget that Roger won 2012 Wimbledon with a slipped disc in his back. Wins over Djokovic and Murray in his worst condition.
 
gino said:
You seem to forget that Roger won 2012 Wimbledon with a slipped disc in his back. Wins over Djokovic and Murray in his worst condition.
Click to expand...
Almost 5 years ago. Recoverybtime for any human being is alot longer in mid thirties.

If he has a significant problem or slight tear he is going to really struggle . If not an issue then he will win no 18.
 
Nostradamus said:
one thing to note though is Grigor is Undefeated this year in 2017. He has not lost a single match. This makes him very dangerous indeed.
Click to expand...
Great post. People are overlooking dimitrov.

He has a real shot to beat nadal. Problem is with dimitrov and why i hope nadal puts him in hisnplace is that the sport cant rely on dimitrov to show the dedicstion of the big 4.

If he won the ao he may sleep wifh 500 pop stars for next 12 months and not be a threat at other tournaments.
 
Nostradamus said:
one thing to note though is Grigor is Undefeated this year in 2017. He has not lost a single match. This makes him very dangerous indeed.
Click to expand...

Neither has Federer. This can only mean one thing. The next big bang will occur when undefeated Baby Fed meets Undefeated Daddy Fed in the 2017 Australian Open Final.


AOhpKa4.jpg
 
Nadal2013 said:
Still not many bar murray and djokovic would have beat zverev that day as he was brutally good. Think he would have beat federer due to it being less physical.

Monfils though is not a player u can judge a win againsg him by. And raonic has no backhand and woeful movement and a very predictable serve so as delughted i am to see nadal back playing well im not of the opinion this is old nadal and wont be surprised if he loses to dimitrov.

Even if he wins the whole tournament in my view he still needs to beat djokovic before we can say he is truly back.

The media hype though is insane.
Click to expand...

Yeah actually I picked Raonic to beat Nadal, just because he can lose to anyone, but I looked at the match stats of the matches he won and in the matches he won he played the big points better than Nadal did. He pretty much needs to be clutch to beat Nadal and he was the opposite of clutch in their match 2 days ago.
 
Dimitrov has a chance to ruin two Cinderellas

seriously, after the initial disappointment from the two camps his championship would be very good for the sport too...good personable guy, good talent, who made a good turnaround...but lets face it, also because all of the talk, bordering on embarrassment, of the groups below the Big 4/5 not being able to step up
 
Nadal2013 said:
Almost 5 years ago. Recoverybtime for any human being is alot longer in mid thirties.

If he has a significant problem or slight tear he is going to really struggle . If not an issue then he will win no 18.
Click to expand...

Agreed, although 2012 wasn't very long ago, and his hip adductor plays a lesser role in the potency of his serve
 
Nadal2013 said:
Great post. People are overlooking dimitrov.

He has a real shot to beat nadal. Problem is with dimitrov and why i hope nadal puts him in hisnplace is that the sport cant rely on dimitrov to show the dedicstion of the big 4.

If he won the ao he may sleep wifh 500 pop stars for next 12 months and not be a threat at other tournaments.
Click to expand...

IMO... if Dimitrov plays to his potential, he wins. If his balls shrivel and retract like they often do when a member of generation useless sees a member of the big 4 on the other side of the net, he loses.
 
Sentinel said:
What exactly do these figures mean ?
I keep getting pairs of figures on my livestream. What do they mean ?



@Marius_Hancu could you explain the figures ? they are from the livestream you linked
Click to expand...
AFAIK they're payout. So if you bet 1$ on a certain player and he wins, the figure next to the respective name is the return you get for that 1$.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Dimitrov is to 2.0 Joker what Nadal is to Federer
Replies
24
Views
3K
Deleted member 307496
D
N
Federer to beat nadal
Replies
4
Views
528
Tuskarr
Tuskarr
Cabeza del Demonio
20for20 #9: 2017 SF, Nadal vs Dimitrov
Replies
10
Views
812
JaoSousa
JaoSousa
serbiavic
Analysis on Dimitrov
Replies
9
Views
1K
DariaGT
DariaGT
AssaultJoker
No bright light for Dimitrov/Raonic/Nishikori generation
Replies
3
Views
754
Bukmeikara
Bukmeikara
Back
Top