My own Fed vs Rafa thread - as a newbie that is

Snooker

New User
Hi there.
I have seen already many threads covering the Fed vs Rafa topic but since I am new here I wanted to start my own thread in order to expose my thoughts. I hope nobody minds my imperfect english, just bear in mind my native language is german. :)

Here we go: First of all, I am a huge tennis fan obviously and I am glad to have found a forum where tennis can be discussed in all aspects. I appreciate not just to watch Fed and Rafa of course but many other players as well. However the rivalry between those 2 players is obviously a top focus at the latest since the other defeat of Fed in the MC final. Indeed Rafa is the only guy Fed has a bad record against since he started his domination end of 03.

I was wondering how does it come that one single defeat calls so much attention and I guess it's because the domination of Fed got so overwhelming over the last 2 years that people have just been kind of desperately looking for a guy who can give him a real challenge. Well, as it seems we have the highly anticipated challenge at hand (well, maybe already since last year) and I think this is the best that can happen to tennis sports because honestly, didn't you also feel at times a bit bored about all the easy wins of Fed, all the records he has broken so easily with so little resistance by his opponents, didn't it sometimes almost appear like he just keeps on playing against records while nobody stands in his way. Since he overcame his early threats (Hewitt, Nalbandian) he was basically playing in a class of his own. That kind of dominance hasn't been seen since the days of Lendl, Vilas, McEnroe or Sampras and many (including Agassi) have named Fed already the GOAT.

Then all of the sudden a young teenager popped up out of nowhere providing him with the first real challenge since his reign started. In turn Fed has now a quite unique opportunity to finally prove that he is indeed the GOAT --- WHAT A GREAT CHALLENGE. He only has to overcome the biggest threat ever in the name of Rafa, but this obviously is not gonna be an easy thing to accomplish. I am pretty much sure the FO title will remain the biggest goal in Fed's carreer, no matter what, though he still may insist Wimbledon means most to him. Personally I think if ever Fed can win the FO it's gonna be this year or at the latest next year simply because he is playing right now at his very peak level and I doubt there is much potential left to improve his game.

Besides the fact that Rafa is basically a clay and slow hard court specialist while Fed prefers grass and fast hard courts there can be no doubt that both players have a huge edge over the rest of the field. Both have won 11 titles last year and have nearly perfect records in their books. Fed has won 23 consecutive finals since his defeat at the Masters while Rafa has won 14 out of 16 finals and is unbeaten on clay since 42 matches. So both players have great records and surely deserve a lot respect. I think we do no justice to each of the players to just compare their personal head-to-head record. As has been said in another thread there were a lot great players in the past who also had bad records against certain players that have been called their nemesis, but that surely hasn't effected their overall achievements and their place in tennis history. As of today Fed has already secured his place in the books with 7 slam titles and I am sure he will add some more. Rafa has just captured 1 slam so far, so there is still a long way to go for him to be called in the same line from a historical point of view but I am sure he will also make his way through as Fed has done though his carreer may not last as long due to his energetic game style.

Having said that it's quite fascinating to compare both players game styles. Don't you agree they can hardly be any more different? However it seems that Rafa is able to neutralize some of Feds strenghts to a certain degree with his kind of play, especially with his heavy topspin on clay. I have never before seen a guy hitting the ball with such a heavy spin, just completely crazy, I am still wondering how the hell he creates that much spin. The ball usually bounces more than shoulder high behind the baseline which makes it extremely difficult for his opponents to put pressure on the ball or to counteract in whatever way.

Rafa is pure energy and volition and with his incredible athleticism plus his mental strenght he has become the factor he is. Coria perfectly summed it up after his defeat in MC when he talked about "the intensity that Nadal puts in each point. He is like a beast, an animal on the court. He's very strong and he's very well prepared." Gaudio put it in similar words after his defeat in the semis. Though Gaudio played one of his best matches and even secured the first set he was unable to keep up with Rafa in the long distance.

It seems to me that Rafa is the exact antipode to Fed. While Fed delights us with his fluent and seemingly effortlessness game, his fine touch, his all-court-coverage, his great footwork and his shot making variety Rafa in turn gives us the feeling to witness the battle of a gladiator where it's all about the fighting spirit. Likewise Hewitt, just Rafa has much better and more effective weapons in his arsenal.

While Fed being the artist, the eloquent and talkative man of the world, the person of integrity, intelligent and fluent in 4 languages, Rafa appears to be the simple minded man from majorca island (the animal, the beast), surprisingly still a bit bashful despite his success, hardly able to communicate in english, not very talkative at all but... all in all a very likable person as well in my opinion. In fact Rafa's shy appearance outside the court stands in sharp contrast to his confidence he shows on-court.

When Fed meets Rafa it's like a battle of the artist vs the craftsman, of ingenuity vs power and will... and isn't that the most fascinating thing to watch? I am not sure if Fed will ever get the edge over Rafa, in fact I have my doubts, but anyway, for me it doesn't really matter, what matters are exciting and thrilling matches which we hopefully can enjoy the next couple of years.

One thing to close out my little story. I had always greatest respect for Fed as a person but the way he talked about Rafa lately was a little disappointing for me. To classify Rafa as a one-dimensional player was not a classy statement. Even if I do agree to a certain extend this statement has shown a bit of disrespect which is a pity. Also to constantly repeat he's on the way of figuring Rafa out in order to beat him is not really appropriate. 4 matches should have been enough to figure out a one-dimensional player, shouldn't it? I think actually Fed is quite a bit afraid of Rafa and that for a good reason.

I had a vision lately that Fed will loose the FO semis because of fear for losing again to Rafa in the final. Of course I hope my vision is wrong because I would love to see them battling in the FO final... while Fed grinding out Rafa in the fifth. :mrgreen:

That would be the coronation of a great carreer, the icing on the cake. Well, let's wait and see. I think he would have deserved it. Cheers for now.
 
Welcome Snooker. Sound like you are a true tennis fan. Yes, I agree with you that Fed is better than Nadal, simply put. One word of advice though, people on message board are usually too lazy to ready through a long essay like yours. :) Have fun.
 
Snooker said:
One thing to close out my little story. I had always greatest respect for Fed as a person but the way he talked about Rafa lately was a little disappointing for me. To classify Rafa as a one-dimensional player was not a classy statement.

I agree completely i was rooting for nadal just because fed said that. When the going gets tough that's when you show your class. I don't agree with nadal being one-dimensional as that would put him in the same class as a no talent except for a first serve roddick. Nadal's got impeccable passing shots and great hands at net not to mention an untouchable competetive fire right now. I think all is not lost for roger though, I don't get the feeling that nadal's physicality is wearing him down as much as other guys. Of course if he just took james blake's strategy and not turn it into a war of attrition at all, he'd do a lot better. Roger is just too stubborn right now due to his unprecedented success.
 
Hi Snooker; thanks for a great post. Your analysis of the best 2 players in the world is spot on. Federer needs to start a little better than he has the last few times he's played Nadal. He also needs somehow to psychologically not be affected by the fact that he's playing on clay. Let's hope he'll figure the "Nadal" puzzle by the time RG comes along and provide us with a great French final with his nemesis.....
 
one of the few threads in the last couple days, which actually makes sense and shows some insight...good first post I say
plus it's always nice to see a fellow countryman on this board :)
 
Welcome to the board. That was a very nice post and I did not see that one coming - based on the thread title! :D

And I also join you guys in a disappointment wih Fed's latest Rafa remarks.
 
Great Thread! Very objective and well put! I do have one point of contention. You asked how one defeat can bring so much attention? Well its really much more than one defeat. Ever since Raf won the French , Fed fans have become hysterical. They have been making excuse after excuse. Basically Fed have fans have said over and over again that Nadals win at the French was a fluke and that Fed simply had a bad day. With Nadals 3 set to 1 win in Monte carlo nadal has finally proven that He is more than a match for Fed on clay. With his win at Monte Carlo Fed fans have now been forced to admit that Nadal is dominant on clay courts. This is a huge psycological blow to Fed and especially his fans. Nadals win at Monte carlo is the defining point so far in this very young mans career. His 43rd win on clay proves he is a master. Monte Carlo was much more than a mere win....it was a win that broke the back of his critics and has made Nadal the undisputed king of clay! ! Long live the king!
 
I think, TPT, that the Dubai loss was an issue, too. IMO, that was a far more impressive win by Rafa than the one in Monte Carlo.
 
VamosRafa said:
I think, TPT, that the Dubai loss was an issue, too. IMO, that was a far more impressive win by Rafa than the one in Monte Carlo.

I have to agree.

In MC Fed clearly had problems with finding his footwork on clay, and he will definitely improve from that in the remaining weeks, I think.
 
Snooker said:
Hi there.

Hi, and welcome! You'll find we're all open minded and thoughtful, here. I'm sure you'll be an excellent addition to the fold. Be well!

First of all...the rivalry between those 2 players is obviously a top focus at the latest since the other defeat of Fed in the MC final.

Sure. They are, after all, 1 and 2, and this is the claycourt season (#2's domain). Only makes sense the spotlight is on these guys.

I was wondering how does it come that one single defeat calls so much attention and I guess it's because the domination of Fed got so overwhelming over the last 2 years that people have just been kind of desperately looking for a guy who can give him a real challenge.

No, the actual reason it draws so much attention is because Nadal fans blow his EVERY meager accomplishment way out of proportion. Nadal takes a crap? A masterpiece! Worthy of Rodin! Nadal wins a meaningless tournament? Fed's reign of terror is over! Nadal's resume is suddenly much more impressive, and never you mind the fact that this one-slam wonder still has only one meaningful title to his name over a no-longer-new three/four year professional career.

He only has to overcome the biggest threat ever in the name of Rafa, but this obviously is not gonna be an easy thing to accomplish.

See? This is what I'm talking about. You go out of your way to try to remain balanced, yet here you go declaring Nadal THE BIGGEST THREAT EVER! By what set of criteria? He's won ONE FREAKING TOURNAMENT OF CONSEQUENCE. He's not the biggest threat ever, he's not the greatest claycourter ever, he's not even within shooting distance of the guys at the bottom of the list. He's a one-slam wonder with nothing else on his resume except a handful of minor trophies and a host of DNP - injury outcomes.

Fed has won 23 consecutive finals since his defeat at the Masters while Rafa has won 14 out of 16 finals and is unbeaten on clay since 42 matches. So both players have great records and surely deserve a lot respect.

Perhaps, but not THAT much respect. There haven't been that many tournaments total since the Master's, much less have Fed and Nadal amassed 37 titles between them here in the early part of 2006.

Rafa has just captured 1 slam so far, so there is still a long way to go for him to be called in the same line from a historical point of view but I am sure he will also make his way through as Fed has done though his carreer may not last as long due to his energetic game style.

I agree with you! Rafa's achievements so far ARE meager, and he IS on the quick road to burnout. We're looking at a complete collapse by the mid-20's, with a couple Frenches and little else to show for it. Bruguera in pirate pants.

While Fed being the artist, the eloquent and talkative man of the world, the person of integrity, intelligent and fluent in 4 languages, Rafa appears to be the simple minded man from majorca island (the animal, the beast)

I agree with you here, as well. I usually stop short of calling him simple, but let's call a spade a spade, shall we? The guy, frankly, comes off a little "duh-duh."

One thing to close out my little story. I had always greatest respect for Fed as a person but the way he talked about Rafa lately was a little disappointing for me. To classify Rafa as a one-dimensional player was not a classy statement. Even if I do agree to a certain extend this statement has shown a bit of disrespect which is a pity. Also to constantly repeat he's on the way of figuring Rafa out in order to beat him is not really appropriate.

I thought Germany had moved beyond the crippling need to sugar-coat everything in a glaze of sickly-sweet political correctness. Why must Federer lie about Nadal and artificially fellate him with praise in order to give an interview? If the greatest player the world has ever seen says he's working it out, then he's working it out, and who are we to doubt him? Why is it disrespectful to offer cogent analysis of his competitors? Would you rather he say that Roddick's game is scintillating and brilliant? Hewitt's complex and tough to crack? Nadal's dizzying in its variety? It would all be horse ****.

4 matches should have been enough to figure out a one-dimensional player, shouldn't it?

Why would you think so? It took him longer than that to figure out his other nemeses. So why should you doubt him this time? He always does figure them out, and rarely looks back once he has. It's not like he can whip up a Nadal-golem out of clay and work out the hitches all day, every day. He can only puzzle it out one final at a time. He tries mixing up tactics, and if they don't work on that day, then he shrugs, moves on, and comforts himself with the fact that he's a legend and Nadal is a one-slam afterthought. One dimension can be tough. One couldn't reach #2 in the world with one dimension, otherwise. But it's crackable. It just takes time. I've seen nothing in Fed's history to suggest that he won't figure it out, just like I've seen nothing in Fed's history to suggest he should have figured it out already. When a player presents a style that troubles him, it takes a while. Always has. How many matches to work out Henman, for example? But while he's working on that puzzle, he continues to amass titles and Grand Slam trophies. Nadal, meanwhile, continues to trouble Fed, but to be otherwise historically trivial. THAT's why you should give credence to Fed's opinion that the kid is a one trick pony. It's a good trick, but ultimately insignificant.

Cheers for now.

You too, dawg.
 
Back
Top