I want your excuses why Nadal won Wimbledon 2008

Federer 2007 vs Nadal 2008 at Wimbledon, who wins?

  • Federer

    Votes: 29 55.8%
  • Nadal

    Votes: 23 44.2%

  • Total voters
    52

Benjamin Rio

Professional
Lol at people talking about Nadal fans with the complex. Sorry dude, no one obsesses over their hero the way Federer stans do. You can tell it's grass season by the amount of trolling that goes on here.

Anyways, I'll go with Mono. Federer hadn't lost a set going into the Final but that's because his mono only affected him in the Final.
I think it affected him all year round losing to Simon Stephanek Nadal Blake Fish. He had to wait until april to win his first tournament ....a ATP 250 in Estoril. 2008 was the only year he lost in RR at WTF. So please stop bullshitting by supporting Bull Cheat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Roger_Federer_tennis_season
 

Jonas78

Legend
Except that Federer was still in his prime (though not peak) in 2008. Nadal in 2015 was at his absolute worst. So your comparison makes no sense.
One match doesnt prove anything. Federer is 2-1 vs Rafa at W, Fed has 8 titles, Rafa 2. Claiming one match proves peak-Rafa > peak-Fed on grass is just silly.
 
One match doesnt prove anything. Federer is 2-1 vs Rafa at W, Fed has 8 titles, Rafa 2. Claiming one match proves peak-Rafa > peak-Fed on grass is just silly.
I never said anything like that. Only somebody very ignorant might make such a statement. I just said that it makes no sense to compare 2008 Federer with 2015 Nadal.
 

Jonas78

Legend
I never said anything like that. Only somebody very ignorant might make such a statement. I just said that it makes no sense to compare 2008 Federer with 2015 Nadal.
Well i agree 2015 was Nads worst year and that 2008 wasnt Feds worst. 2008 was certainly a slump though, and definetly among his worst years. His match win% was just above 80%
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
This was one of Fed's best Wimbledon performances against baby Nadal, who probably played one of his worst matches on grass. But Nadal won anyway.

But it doesn't matter, since both players are 1000 times better today than they were back then. They both had a lot more practice since then.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
Well i agree 2015 was Nads worst year and that 2008 wasnt Feds worst. 2008 was certainly a slump though, and not among his best years.
Well i agree 2015 was Nads worst year and that 2008 wasnt Feds worst. 2008 was certainly a slump though, and not among his best years.
Double standard like always with Bull Cheat supporters.

When he wins against Novak or Fed they are playing the tennis of their life.
When he loses lack of form injury Carlos Benarbes Roof etc etc
 

Jonas78

Legend
This was one of Fed's best Wimbledon performances against baby Nadal, who probably played one of his worst matches on grass. But Nadal won anyway.

But it doesn't matter, since both players are 1000 times better today than they were back then. They both had a lot more practice since then.
Youre quite funny, i give you that.
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
trolling aside, the mono is a documented medical fact. mono finishes careers, he was lucky to have a mild case. but he certainly lost a quarter step after. if he cared about H2Hs he wouldn't have played thru it but that's not how he rolls.
 

beltsman

Legend
Firstly, I think the best form Fed showed on grass is the latter rounds of W2003 and all of W2006.

However, not really many excuses for this win, though it did take an extraordinary set of circumstances to take Fed down. It took the second greatest player of all time with a kryptonite game, giving arguably his all time best performance on grass to take the victory 9-7 in the fifth after an unprecedentedly crushing blow at RG weeks prior. And to think, it took that to stop Fed from winning 7 Wimbledons in a row. We speak of Nadal's obviously GOAT single-surface dominance, but Fed's on grass has also been quite something.
Yet all it took in 2010 was Berdych, 2011 Tsonga, 2013 Stakhovsky hahaha!

Bull is the GOAT deal with it
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
Yet all it took in 2010 was Berdych, 2011 Tsonga, 2013 Stakhovsky hahaha!

Bull is the GOAT deal with it
Bull is Goat when he's not injured fit and Carlos Benarbes is not allowed to umpire his matches and when the roof is not on and there's 200 miles per hour wind.

Fed did lost to Stakhovsky in 2013. that was his worst year on the tour. On the other hand Nadal lost to Steve Darcis in the first round of Wimbledon the most prestigious event in tennis when he was playing at his peak. He had just won Rome and FO and was going to win Canada Open Cincinnati and us open.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
It's a media hype to somehow elevate 2008 match to historic levels .
Quality wise 2007 final was way better .

And fed has won 3 more Wimbledons after 2008 final loss and Rafa has won just 1 .
So I don't understand how is 2008 match so important ?
I only see it as just another major final .
Had fed never won another Wimbledon again after 2008 final loss ,den this match would have carried more importance I think..
 

beltsman

Legend
Bull is Goat when he's not injured fit and Carlos Benarbes is not allowed to umpire his matches and when the roof is not on and there's 200 miles per hour wind.

Fed did lost to Stakhovsky in 2013. that was his worst year on the tour. On the other hand Nadal lost to Steve Darcis in the first round of Wimbledon the most prestigious event in tennis when he was playing at his peak. He had just won Rome and FO and was going to win Canada Open Cincinnati and us open.
That's proves the opposite. If Bull was winning EVERYTHING ELSE around the tournament, then clearly something was wrong that tournament.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Lol plz, Maestronians dropped the "im ok with Nadal too" act :whistle::whistle::whistle:
its not like fed fans are a monolith. you have fed fans who dont like nadal ,fedal fans (though imo i still yhink those are mostly nadal first) djokodal fans and the rare djokerer fans and ofcourse the individual fanbases as well
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
It's a media hype to somehow elevate 2008 match to historic levels .
Quality wise 2007 final was way better .

And fed has won 3 more Wimbledons after 2008 final loss and Rafa has won just 1 .
So I don't understand how is 2008 match so important ?
I only see it as just another major final .
Had fed never won another Wimbledon again after 2008 final loss ,den this match would have carried more importance I think..
this is pretty much where I'm at. I suppose its history making in the way any first time wimbledon winner is, and yes he did knock fed off his throne since he was going for 6 in a row but as you said fed managed to win 3 wimbledons after that, a few other slams including the french to get the career slam so he went on to a fine career as did nadal ofcourse. . I also do think overal fedal have had better matches.

i never watched the documentary they created about this match (the fact they created it over this match says a lot though) but i was listening to a podcast do a review and they said that it was obvious they were trying to liken this story to borg/mcenroe which is kind of hilarious looking back because nadal never forced fed out of the game, he didn't walk away from it the way borg did at an early age.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
this is pretty much where I'm at. I suppose its history making in the way any first time wimbledon winner is, and yes he did knock fed off his throne since he was going for 6 in a row but as you said fed managed to win 3 wimbledons after that, a few other slams including the french to get the career slam so he went on to a fine career as did nadal ofcourse. . I also do think overal fedal have had better matches.

i never watched the documentary they created about this match (the fact they created it over this match says a lot though) but i was listening to a podcast do a review and they said that it was obvious they were trying to liken this story to borg/mcenroe which is kind of hilarious looking back because nadal never forced fed out of the game, he didn't walk away from it the way borg did at an early age.
I was a kid back then and my elder bro was almost in tears (fed fan ) -2008 .
The commentators were shouting as if Nadal had sent Fed into retirement ,like the way they do drama at WWE ..
I was a kid and even I thought that guy fed is going home and won't return .. lol

Btw the season 2014-16 Old fed was world number 2 and , fedal shared two slams in 2017 ..
So it means 2008 final match had no such impact on fed's career as the old pundits and fans make out to be ...
It's just another slam final loss . Dats it .
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
I was a kid back then and my elder bro was almost in tears (fed fan ) -2008 .
The commentators were shouting as if Nadal had sent Fed into retirement ,like the way they do drama at WWE ..
I was a kid and even I thought that guy fed is going home and won't return .. lol

Btw the season 2014-16 Old fed was world number 2 and , fedal shared two slams in 2017 ..
So it means 2008 final match had no such impact on fed's career as the pundits and Rafa fans make out to be ...
It's just another slam final loss . Dats it .
tbh i think back then, well still now but to a smaller extent, the main storyline was always the defeat of federer, the take down of this guy who was always winning and so nadal, fed;s biggest rival at that time was able to defeat him at his "home" so to speak that was big for tennis pundits/media/fans but honestly pundits imo are dumb as evident by all the seed drama. they fact that they tried to more or less retire fed based on this match was something else.

people still look forward to or take interest in the win over federer. look how much was generated when tsitsipas took down federer at AO despite the fact that given the ages, that should be a regular occurrence.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
tbh i think back then, well still now but to a smaller extent, the main storyline was always the defeat of federer, the take down of this guy who was always winning and so nadal, fed;s biggest rival at that time was able to defeat him at his "home" so to speak that was big for tennis pundits/media/fans but honestly pundits imo are dumb as evident by all the seed drama. they fact that they tried to more or less retire fed based on this match was something else.

people still look forward to or take interest in the win over federer. look how much was generated when tsitsipas took down federer at AO despite the fact that given the ages, that should be a regular occurrence.
Agree here..
It was more about beating Federer than other way round .
Fed getting beaten created more enticing news back then .
Nadal made a career out of beating him in big matches initially .
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
The first chapter will be titled, "SeedGate".

If Nadal goes out early to Kyrgios you'll be able to fill the sea with the salt about the draw. I'll try to keep my hysterics to a minimum if that happens.
You're too classy to go down that road, Nat. :)
 

jklos

Professional
lmao tbh most likely nadal was winning either way but that match really should have been called for darkness. imo they wanted to keep it going though because they wouldn't be able to generate the same story.
You're probably right but I think it affected Federer more than Nadal. Who knows. Playing in the dark sucks though. It can really throw off everything.
 

Rapenj

New User
There was no pretending in the first place. It's basically equal opportunity from all sides and has been forever depending on who is doing well in the moment. This idea that Fed fans are the "worst." is BS. If anything it's always been Nadal and Djokovic fans together vs Federer fans because I can guarantee you if Fed ever gets his slam count surpassed he'll be piled on here by two fanbases. There's a few Nadal fans that dislike Djokovic and vice versa, but they're few and far between. 95% of Djokovic and Nadal fans here have a common enemy and it's Federer. Make no mistake.
Nah. Federer is the GOAT, no doubt about it. And he's theone that plays more beautifully. I'm a Nadal fan
 

Bertie B

Professional
For the same reason why the British couldn't defeat Germany in a fair fight.

Federer had reached his Equinox.

2007 was the day of the equinox. 2008 was the day after the equinox.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
You're probably right but I think it affected Federer more than Nadal. Who knows. Playing in the dark sucks though. It can really throw off everything.
yeah i always hesitate to bring it up though because i mean it was dark for both of them so that can only hold up for so long. liek i said i think fed was lucky to even get it to a 5th he just was not good that day but i mention the darkness because i do feel like they would have lost the story they were pushing for. nadal finally triumphing over federer and knocking him off the wimbledon throne after two rain days and in the dark at that was the story and the intensity and drama they tried to buzz up would have been lost had they stopped and returned the next day. a shame tbh because 11 years later it ended up being just a match and not any kind of defining moment for their careers especiallly not fed's.
 
Top