tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Nadal has no AO and no YEC
If Fed and Verdasco were a little clutch at AO 09....
- Thread starter tennisaddict
- Start date
victorcruz
Hall of Fame
If if if does not exist
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
If, if, if... Doesn't exist.
Newballsplease872
Rookie
Yeah two crazy chokes in b2b matches.
But thats how luckdal rolls.
Insanely lucky dude
But thats how luckdal rolls.
Insanely lucky dude
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
OldschoolKIaus
Hall of Fame
If there are no ATP finals on clay courts
Who you gonna call?
Uncle Toni!
Who you gonna call?
Uncle Toni!
PeoplesChamp
Legend
This is what happens when Nadal faces ANYONE worth ANYTHING on HC.
Subway Tennis
Legend
Federer and The Sauceman aren't capable of the type of ball-bashing par excellence and extreme movement we saw from Thiem and Nadal tonight.
No need to disparage Nadal, let Domi have the moment. He played brilliantly.
No need to disparage Nadal, let Domi have the moment. He played brilliantly.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
He will still have 4 of the big 5
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Is sport, ¿no?
victorcruz
Hall of Fame
We have come a long way, but I'm happy to call you my friend. It's gonna be a long day. I woke up in the middle of the night to watch this, sacrificed my sleep and the alarm went off minutes after this match ended. So much for sleep lol:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/BFF27-5ac2f4b38023b9003671cb46.jpg)
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm glad he won it. Otherwise we'd be subject to endless talk about how the Career slam is meaningless and Australia is a fake tournament no one cared about until recently and the USO counts enough on his resume for both.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Verdasco was actually clutch overall, Nadal outplayed him yet it was that close. Federer was really unclutch, indeed. Part and parcel of his career though, shoulda had 26 slems already.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
Remind me who beat Nadal at RG 2009?
If Nadal had been more clutch, no RG for Federer plus another beatdown extradonaire in finals.
If Nadal had been more clutch, no RG for Federer plus another beatdown extradonaire in finals.
forehandblast
Rookie
26 slams, LOL! How on earth do you come up with that figure.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
AO 05, WB 08, AO 09, USO 09, USO 11, WB 19. (Federer was definitely playing better than Nadal at 2011 USO up to the final, actual Federer might have contrived to lose even if he beat Djokovic, but this hypothetical Clutcherer I am imagining wouldn't.)
JaoSousa
Hall of Fame
Key phrase here.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Considering I am listing slams he *should have* won but didn't, it's only appropriate.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
He'd go from needing 18 more Slams to needing 21 more Slams (assuming Federer would have beaten Verdasco, which is a safe assumption because any good tennis analyst starts from the premise that none of Federer's defeats count). Why, you ask? Well, followers have to go far beyond their leader. As Federer has 20 Slams, Nadal needs 37, so he needs 18 more. But if Nadal didn't win AO 2009, then he'd now have 18 - and that's on the generous assumption of no butterfly effect. And Federer would have 21, on the same assumption. So, Nadal would need 19 just to get to 37. But whereas in the case of a 37-20 race, it's just about fair enough to say that the man who came second has gone sufficiently past his leader to count as being ahead overall, that's not true of 37-21. If Federer had 21 Slams, Nadal would need to get to 39 slams for his achievement to be meaningful, so he would need 21 more slams from now. Project 39!
forehandblast
Rookie
Federer should not have won Wimbledon 08. Nadal should have finished the match before even getting to a 5th set.
Australian Open 05 I could sort of see, but don't really agree. Federer had a match point and Safin hit a perfect lob which would have been very hard for Federer to win the point off of. It was an amazing match, and Federer just fell short.
The others maybe, but Berdych should have taken out Federer at AO 09 anyway.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer should have won WB 08 in straight sets actually if he wasn't so pathetic at converting BPs and maintaining a lead. Look at the stats - he had higher RPW (return points won %) in each of the first three sets yet nearly lost in straights. That would've been an all-time statistical choke. (On the same note, Djokovic should have won the 2014 final in straight sets because he had higher RPW in set 1 as well not to mention a set point on serve, but Federer should have been two sets to love up in 2015.)
Safin played excellently in the fifth set of AO 05 semi so it was nothing egregious, but wasting the *5-2 double minibreak lead in the breaker was kinda bad from Fed, more than the match point where Marat did well though Federer probably shouldn't have s&v'd on 2nd serve in the first place.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
If Soderling hadn't pulled off the biggest upset in tennis history, Ol' Rog wouldn't have a single RG. At least RAFA beat the best at the time to win his AO.
Similar threads
- Poll
