Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by merwy, Apr 18, 2013.
You never do though. And yet he continually does.
Also 1000 lols for Tsonga beating Nadal tomorrow.
Because I don't believe that. Grigor's stats for this match weren't so hot themselves. If Nadal had actually showed up instead of playing like a clown he would have won in straights.
Just wait and see for yourself. You also laughed when I said Grigor could win today because Nadal is playing like garbage. Turns out I was right.
Also, the weather for the next two days is supposed to be rainy and cold. If Nadal somehow makes the final he will lose his ass off. He has zero chance of winning this tournament. Zero.
hahahah u really arent serious are you now ?
No you werent right because he didn't win. I never said he wouldn't give a good match, but I said he wouldn't win. I was right.
And don't say "well he almost did" because he srvived til 4-4 in the decider. Remember this little quote?
Yeah I said Djokovic would have to play better than he had been to beat Tsonga. You laughed and said he wouldn't trouble him. Tsonga got 4 or 5 match points. You didn't give me any credit there, so you don't get any now.
Also if it's rainy Nadal will get the match taken off. Simples.
Sure am. Maybe you missed the match today?
I was given a lot of sh*t for even daring to believe Nadal would lose to Grigor. Some people were saying he would barely even win games. I was a whole lot closer to being right than they were.
What does this mean? I was saying that those conditions do not suit Nadal because he refuses to adapt. He sucks when it's cold and wet and always has.
Yep and you gave me sh** for daring to say Djokovic would need to up his game or he'd lose to Tsonga and he had to save multiple match points. I was alot closer to being right than you, but you never admitted as much, so you get no credit here. Sorry to be tough with you,but you must play by the rules :lol: And I was never one of the people who said Dimitrov would barely win games
What does this mean? It means just like at RG when it gets rainy he will shout at the umpire til the match is halted til it's dry again.
Yep, because we all know tennis is supposed to be played in the rain.
Your favorite is about to win this tournament so you should be thrilled. Enjoy it.
It's not meant to be played in the dark either, but I bet you werent moaning when Nadal won Wimbledon 2008.
And my actual point is, it won't be played in the rain long because Nadal will complain.
Federer is not even playing. Nadal is a big favourite to win. I would tell you to enjoy it, but no matter how much Nadal dominates clay, you never act happy, so no point.
yes you do, your vision is and always will be 20/20...everyone here knows that
Nadal didn't look that good today but hopefully he can find some intensity for tomorrow. As a Nadal fan, I don't mind when he doesn't play that great (everyone has off days), but what really concerns me is when he seems listless and not particularly invested in the match. Perhaps he had an argument with his girlfriend in the morning. Who knows?
It was nice to see him pick it up at 4-4 in the third and get fired up. I think he has a chance against Djokovic. I'd put it at about 50/50. These conditions are not great for him. I wish the sun would come out, but it doesn't look as though that's in the forecast.
He'll wipe Tsonga off the map...4 and 3 if jw is lucky.
that's the pissy thing..never acknowledges his/her mistakes, never gives anyone else credit for being right...how old do you think this tool is?
She's probably about 25-28, but she acts about 6 most of the time.
I know the last set was 6-1, but the 2009 final against Djokovic felt the closest Nadal came to defeat in Monte Carlo from 2005 onwards, more so than today even. The semi final with Gasquet in 2005 was another close one.
I lol ed at the 6-1 third set being more closer than todays match
At the time it felt like Djokovic could beat Nadal and obviously you felt he had way more chance than Dimitrov at closing out a final set, but that final set did in reality get away quickly, so very early in the 3rd i felt the chance had gone. Gasquet was a closer final set, I didn't watch the match but the set Gasquet won was a tiebreak. So I still gotta say, personally that this match feels like the closest he's been to losing. they were basically level in the match til the last 2 games and Nadal had to survive a tough game to serve it out. Not to mention he was I think 2 points from losing serve at 3-4 down.
I guess Djokovic had a better chance at winning considering who he was, even a break down, where as Dimitrov even if he was a break up you would doubt him more. But forgetting who Nadal was playing and just the way the match went, I pick today.
I don't know any players who adapt to cold and wet conditions.
Actually I agree with Towser. Dimitrov has taken more games off Nadal at MC in a best of 3 match than anyone else since 2007 (when best of 5 matches were replaced by best of 3).
Djokovic probably played at a higher level in 2009 but, unfortunately for him, so did Nadal. I watched that match and recall Djokovic sinking to his knees at one point after Nadal hit an amazing passing shot to break him. As well as Djokovic was playing, I never felt Nadal was going to lose it. In the Dimitrov match, I felt that Dimitrov had a good chance to win.
I think NSK should enter this thread and get some sense into these people.
Cheers. Also they had a 2 game different on aggregate. That's the smallest margin of any match Nadal has played at MC since 2005.
The previous best was Andy Murray, with a 3 game gap. Just so you know Not bad at all.
I think NSK and Clarky need a reality show where they live together in the same house.
If Dmitrov beat Rafa today, he would have been the New Darling of the Rafa Haters Brigade. Maybe next time heh !!.............:twisted::lol:
a couple of interviews
Nice interviews from both players, both giving each other a lot of credit
He's playing Barca so who knows...
Apparently Dimitrov is the 7th, and 4th to avoid a breadstick or bagel in the same match after winning a set; 3rd to have won a set in the match and avoided a breadstick or bagel.
2013 Dimitrov QF: 2-6, 6-2, 4-6
2011 Murray SF: 4-6, 6-2, 1-6
2009 Djokovic F: 3-6, 6-2, 1-6
2006 Federer F: 2-6, 7-6(2), 3-6, 6-7(5)
2006 Gaudio SF: 7-5, 1-6, 1-6
2005 Coria F: 3-6, 1-6, 6-0, 5-7
2005 Gasquet SF: 7-6(6), 4-6, 3-6
the murray match was 2011
We need to pitch this idea to Endemol, quick!
Ha! He'd get that contract printed up pronto!
Actually, there's an even better example of what a moonball is later in this thread, to the point that I'd call it lobbing with a displaced opponent. I haven't the time to find the highlights from one of Nadal's losses to Novak last year that was NOT occasional hitting off pace, but definitely a degree of moonballing, successive shots in a rally, and also within the same game.
I agree with your analysis of what it takes to hit with topspin. That same analysis can be used for other shots also.
Your first paragraph, spot on. I think we're singing from the same hymn sheet, but have crossed wires. The shot I refer to as (subjectively) ugly is his effective forehand that clears the net and kicks like a mule. It works very well for him, so why not use it? On occasion, yes, he moonballs, that was my point also.
The remaining paragraphs... Thank you for taking the time to eloquently write up your opinion on his level of play/tactics upon return recently. I haven't seen many of his matches, so it's good to see someone who has write how/why they think he's doing what he's doing. Your points a and b are very plausible and make sense.
Baby fed played some great tennis today, Rafa looked shaky and is still rusty. We will see if baby fed is going to be the next big gun in tennis.
Haters keep hating, Nadal keep winning. How pathetic.
Being right 3 out of a 100 is meaningless.
No, it's not, it means he is wrong vast majority of time.
Dimitrov really proved me wrong and I am happy to admit that I was completely wrong about how his backhand would hold up today.
Excellent, excellent progress by him.
Nadal beat Djokovic at Roland Garros last year without the sun. The only time that Djokovic got on top was when the balls were soaked like crazy for a set. Nadal had only played Dimitrov once before yesterday, whereas he's played Djokovic 33 times and in every condition imaginable (and has won 19 of the 33 matches).
I'm currently watching the highlights of the match and I'm impressed by what I'm seeing.
Why is Dimitrov handling Nadal's topspin off the backhand side so well considering he has a one hander?
What is the determining factor here?
He's not exactly a giant at 6' 2" and I've seen taller players than him struggle with the massive spin and kick on the ball off the backhand side.
He's placing those backhands with depth and pace, not really giving Nadal that opportunity to step in and pull off a killer shot.
Meanwhile, a certain sexiclass player with 17 slams has a chronic problem with this forehand/backhand dynamic. What gives?
Only when Nadal is losing apparently...
Federer often finessed the backhand, while Dimitrov is hitting through it with confidence and power. Either Dimitrov is simply more confident than Federer, or he has a better backhand than Federer, or he was just in the zone yesterday.
Naturally. If the rain had been bothering Cvac's game that badly, certain people would have been throwing a hissy fit, demanding that the match be stopped.
was a really good match... highly enjoyable tennis.
I just saw the replay of the last part of the match. It's too bad about the cramping for Dimitrov, but even so, he obviously has some real potential. Good for him. I'm sure that match will give him a lot of confidence.
What an AMAZING Match! match of the year IMO and I agree its too bad he started cramping..
Dimitrov vs Nadal is my favorite match of 2013. The more difficult the match is to win the more entertaining it is. Tennis is one of those sports where scoreboard pressure provides entertainment regardless of the level of play.
The Dimitrov backhand held up really well, but one of the reasons why is because he was willing to back up 10-12 feet behind the baseline and let the ball drop more before he hit it back. Fed doesn't back up as far against Nadal which leads to shanks and leaving the ball weak in the middle of the court. If he can move that much backward and forward without cramping he matches up well with Nadal with the strength of his forehand (heaviness) and gets some cheap points on his serve. Dimitrov is also able to hit his backhand high and heavy back off that Nadal forehand with big net clearance which gives him a chance to stay in the point while keeping Nadal from attacking. Fed doesn't play that ball off his own backhand high and heavy enough to neutralize the Nadal forehand.
Zeballos/Nadal was a really awesome match but its a shame it was in the final of a 250 tourny. This one, because it was in Monte Carlo, is a slight favorite because I love the way Dimitrov plays contrasted to Rafa.
Who are those girls? This actually looks entertaining.
Separate names with a comma.