Nadal 2009: First and only Australian Open Win, or Undefeated at Roland Garros?

GRiiECO

GRiiECO

Rookie
For the Nadal fans out there...If you could change history, would you swap Rafa's Australian Open title in 09 (at the expense of his career slam) with Roland Garros to solidify a 10 year streak? Or would you keep it as is?
 
Silly question. Rafa's mythical status at the RG is guaranteed notwithstanding his 2009 loss. The AO was special, considering the drama around the SF and the Final. I wouldn't swap it for anything.
 
AO for sure, maybe his most epic slam win. Really wish his 2009 hadn't got to **** though, he could have easily ended number 1 otherwise. Didn't look after his body well enough
 
Talking about AO,Nadal had perfect chance to do something that Roger and Djokovic havent done and probably wont do anytime soon.Win every GS tournament twice but he blew it up multiple times - against Stan and the biggest choke was against Roger.
 
GRiiECO said:
For the Nadal fans out there...If you could change history, would you swap Rafa's Australian Open title in 09 (at the expense of his career slam) with Roland Garros to solidify a 10 year streak? Or would you keep it as is?
Click to expand...
Happy with the way things played out, personally.
 
Plamen1234 said:
Talking about AO,Nadal had perfect chance to do something that Roger and Djokovic havent done and probably wont do anytime soon.Win every GS tournament twice but he blew it up multiple times - against Stan and the biggest choke was against Roger.
Click to expand...
The biggest choke was against Djokovic, not Roger.
 
Hitman said:
AO 09 was one of the most epic slams of the modern era. AO 09 all the way. IMO Nadals's greatest win.

Besides, Federer and Nadal both happy, they get their career slams.
Click to expand...

You put that above him winning on grass at W 08 ? Not disagreeing btw, just interested why.
 
Abhinandan said:
Silly question. Rafa's mythical status at the RG is guaranteed notwithstanding his 2009 loss. The AO was special, considering the drama around the SF and the Final. I wouldn't swap it for anything.
Click to expand...
This, especially the way he won it. Back to back GRUELLING 5 sets. Great drama. Somehow that grind made the win even sweeter
 
kevaninho said:
You put that above him winning on grass at W 08 ? Not disagreeing btw, just interested why.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Nadal's run through to the final at W 08 was nothing special as far as good players standing in his way. The Nadal v Verdasco match is one of the greatest matches I have ever seen, extreme offense v extreme defense and then to follow with a shotmaking frenzy in the final with a Federer who apart from serving was playing some great ball. W 08 to me isn't his best.
 
I think that Nadal winning the 2009 FO would have been far more impressive than winning the 2009 AO. 10 straight FO titles would have been an insane record. And Nadal deserves 10 straight FO titles and the record for the most consecutive titles at one slam event(instead of sharing the record of 5 straight with Federer and Borg).

10 consecutive FO titles would have been easily the most impressive stint in tennis history. It would be the most unbreakable record in tennis history.
 
Most 500 level tournaments on real tennos surfaces are better run, more challenging, and more respected than the French Open.

That should tell you the answer.
 
Pheasant said:
I think that Nadal winning the 2009 FO would have been far more impressive than winning the 2009 AO. 10 straight FO titles would have been an insane record. And Nadal deserves 10 straight FO titles and the record for the most consecutive titles at one slam event(instead of sharing the record of 5 straight with Federer and Borg).

10 consecutive FO titles would have been easily the most impressive stint in tennis history. It would be the most unbreakable record in tennis history.
Click to expand...
The loss in 2009 motivated and challenged him to win 5 more from 2010-14. Had he won in 2009 too, it is very probable that he would have lost somewhere down the line b/w 10-14. Sports doesn't work like that. Losses are as important in paving the way for victories as the victories themselves.
 
Hitman said:
Absolutely. Nadal's run through to the final at W 08 was nothing special as far as good players standing in his way. The Nadal v Verdasco match is one of the greatest matches I have ever seen, extreme offense v extreme defense and then to follow with a shotmaking frenzy in the final with a Federer who apart from serving was playing some great ball. W 08 to me isn't his best.
Click to expand...

Was W08 not the breakthrough that he could win slams on other surfaces though? Verdasco had a great run, but hes not a great player. Nadal should've put him away a lot easier. He made it more difficult than it should've been.
 
kevaninho said:
Was W08 not the breakthrough that he could win slams on other surfaces though? Verdasco had a great run, but hes not a great player. Nadal should've put him away a lot easier. He made it more difficult than it should've been.
Click to expand...

I think W08 was coming after what happened a year earlier. He was building up and up, and Federer was due a loss after having won five straight. AO 2009 though was just spectacular from Nadal. I think you are underestimating what a good player can do if he catches lightening in a bottle. Verdasco was amped up that whole tournament, don't forget, he beat an inform Murray, who in the eyes of some was actually being picked to win the event. It was five hours of wall to wall high quality tennis that simply did not relent in any way. The Wimbledon 2008 final had too many stops and starts, great drama and story telling, but Nadal needed to be strong mentally for one match IMO. At AO 2009, he first had to stop Verdasco and his 96 winners, and then 48 hours later, go toe to toe with Federer, who IMO was playing better off the ground at AO 2009 than he was at W 08. Nadal still won. That was the event that showed the world he is a worthy number one, a champion for all surfaces.
 
In 20 years time no-one will remember that he didn't win 10 in a row - I bet 90% of people will just assume he did. Not having won AO would have been much more significant.
 
Hitman said:
AO 09 was one of the most epic slams of the modern era. AO 09 all the way. IMO Nadals's greatest win.

Besides, Federer and Nadal both happy, they get their career slams.
Click to expand...
Agree. The Nadal/Verdasco match was arguably a better match than the final.

I also would rank it as Nadal’s greatest win, though Wimbledon 2008 is way up there too.
 
Nadalgaenger said:
Agree. The Nadal/Verdasco match was arguably a better match than the final.

I also would rank it as Nadal’s greatest win, though Wimbledon 2008 is way up there too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, agree with your sentiments also.

Nadal v Verdasco IMO was better than the final, the final had a very poor fifth set. The semi did not. I would rank W 08 very high also, but still put it behind AO 09, for him without a doubt his greatest win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

madmanfool
Federer will win Australian Open 2013
Replies
35
Views
5K
Prisoner of Birth
P
Winner Sinner
  • Poll Poll
[POLL] Is Djokovic better on clay or Nadal on hard outdoor?
2 3
Replies
149
Views
3K
Winner Sinner
Winner Sinner
6-1 6-3 6-0
Which is harder to beat: Nadal at Monte Carlo, or Nadal at Roland Garros?
Replies
47
Views
5K
ElChivoEspañol
ElChivoEspañol
D
Nadal will receive more praise by taking the Slam Record at Wimbledon or the US Open than he would if he'd won Roland Garros 2021
Replies
42
Views
1K
Raul_SJ
Raul_SJ
RaulRamirez
Who are/were the best players to never win their home slam?
Replies
13
Views
491
thrust
T
Back
Top