Nadal has been net UNLUCKY in non-clay slams in his career, not lucky

[Third Serve]

I don’t think fatigue would play a role in Nadal’s potential Wimbledon 2009 campaign. I mean, he’d proven he could recover from grueling Slam SF battles to win the title. Maybe the potential battles with Stepanek, No, I think the biggest obstacle is just going to be Nadal’s historically unreliable early-round Wimbledon form. First-week Wimbledon grass is one of Nadal’s worst conditions as his slew of upsets in 2012-2017 indicate, and even in some of his best runs like 2007 and 2010, he had several five setters and close matches against guys like Robin Haase, Mikhail Youzhny, and Philip Petzschner (who, coincidentally, would also have been Nadal’s predicted third-round opponent in 2009). Not to mention almost going five with Gulbis in his outright best run, 2008. Hewitt is a much more capable grass-court opponent and he went on a pretty nice run in 2009—he’d have been Nadal’s second round opponent. Then you have Stepanek in the fourth round who has a very old-school grass-court game, a type that has historically troubled Nadal on grass. Then Roddick who was near (if not quite at) the form of his life in the QF. I don’t think any version of Nadal, not even 2008, would have an easy time going through this Roddick. Then there’s Murray in the SF who was in pretty good grass court form. And lastly, you have Fed who is no piece of cake on grass, to say the least. There are just so many places where Nadal could lose given his history on grass and (although it’s hard to rely on this because of the small sample) how he hadn’t exactly been 2008-level during the previous few events he’d played (you could tell by the clay season at least that his game was a little less sharp than in 2008, his forehand a little loopier and less deadly).

Taking the unfavorable conditions into account, Wimbledon 2009 would have easily been Nadal’s hardest Slam draw ever were he to somehow win this. I guess it’s still very much possible but I wouldn’t bet on it.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Really unlucky to face Anderson, Medvedev x 2 and Berdych. He also had guys like Youzhny and Gasquet as semi final opponents. Those guys should be more like 4th round opponents. I remember Federer giving Gasquet a beating at Wimbledon in like the second round. He was very fortunate to play very weak competition in some of those wins. He also was very fortunate for the slow court conditions. He’s a bum on fast slick courts.

 

[Sudacafan]

He drove himself to injury playing crazy clay brutal seasons. So it’s his fault.

 

[MadariKatu]

Cilic in worse form beat Nadal in AO 18. but you think Cilic in career best form wouldn't beat Nadal of USO 14 (who was already past his prime)? (unless nadal was in prime form)
ok, boomer.

Nadal had to retire after injuring in the beginning of the 4th, when he was leading 2-1. And 2014 Nadal was better than his 2018 self. Actually, the Nadal-Cilic rivalry is very loopsided in favor of Nadal. He beat Cilic even in 2015 in indoor hard.

 

[killerboss]

8 slams - his career off clay is legendary and on the same level as the likes of Agassi, Mcenroe and Lendl's entire careers. Especially when you factor in his generic consistency and deep runs in slams. "Luck" doesn't come into it.

On "weak draws" - it ain't ever easy winning a slam in the modern game. Only 3 other players in recent times to win slams are Thiem, Medvedev and Cilic. All have made multiple slam finals. "Weak era" perhaps (which all big 3 players have profitted from) but "weak draws" doesn't really exist or more no marks would have won slams.

 

[TripleATeam]

Tennis is a game of circumstance as much as a game of talent, skill, and hard work. The athlete's job is to maximize their chances of a win, which Nadal doesn't do with his style of tennis. He rolls the dice, knowing it'll beat his opponent today but might impact his body in a few months. If the way he wins causes him injuries, it isn't bad luck, it's a consequence of the game.

Nadal benefitting from 3 nice HC slam draws since 2017 (when in the same period, Federer has benefitted from 2, '17W and '18AO, and Djokovic from 3, '18 USO, '21 AO and '21W) is just luck evening trying to even itself out from his horror prime period.

But he is still net unlucky with non-clay slams in his career.

You also shouldn't be comparing weak draws for 2 slams vs 3 slams.
In the same time, Djokovic had only 1 easy HC draw (21AO doesn't count, as he had to go through Zverev and Medvedev. Most on this site even thought Medvedev was the favorite for some reason), and Federer too - 18 AO.

1 weak draw on HC slams vs 3. Bigger discrepancy. But either way I don't want to talk about weak draws, as Nadal beat who was there in front of him. He deserved the wins.

 

[The Blond Blur]

I don’t think fatigue would play a role in Nadal’s potential Wimbledon 2009 campaign. I mean, he’d proven he could recover from grueling Slam SF battles to win the title. Maybe the potential battles with Stepanek, No, I think the biggest obstacle is just going to be Nadal’s historically unreliable early-round Wimbledon form. First-week Wimbledon grass is one of Nadal’s worst conditions as his slew of upsets in 2012-2017 indicate, and even in some of his best runs like 2007 and 2010, he had several five setters and close matches against guys like Robin Haase, Mikhail Youzhny, and Philip Petzschner (who, coincidentally, would also have been Nadal’s predicted third-round opponent in 2009). Not to mention almost going five with Gulbis in his outright best run, 2008. Hewitt is a much more capable grass-court opponent and he went on a pretty nice run in 2009—he’d have been Nadal’s second round opponent. Then you have Stepanek in the fourth round who has a very old-school grass-court game, a type that has historically troubled Nadal on grass. Then Roddick who was near (if not quite at) the form of his life in the QF. I don’t think any version of Nadal, not even 2008, would have an easy time going through this Roddick. Then there’s Murray in the SF who was in pretty good grass court form. And lastly, you have Fed who is no piece of cake on grass, to say the least. There are just so many places where Nadal could lose given his history on grass and (although it’s hard to rely on this because of the small sample) how he hadn’t exactly been 2008-level during the previous few events he’d played (you could tell by the clay season at least that his game was a little less sharp than in 2008, his forehand a little loopier and less deadly).

Taking the unfavorable conditions into account, Wimbledon 2009 would have easily been Nadal’s hardest Slam draw ever were he to somehow win this. I guess it’s still very much possible but I wouldn’t bet on it.

12-17 was his post grass prime though. I’d say 06-11 was his grass prime. Heck, 09 was in between the 2 years he won the whole thing. Hewitt was a good GCer, but he was almost half a decade past his prime by 09 and he actually had a pretty soft draw that year. Stepanek was the first decent player he faced and he went 5 with him IIRC. I honestly think he takes out Hewitt in 4. I agree that Roddick would have been a real test, but I’ll take RAFA playing at/near his best over Roddick on any surface. This one probably goes 5 either way. As far as Murray goes, he’s won 1 set in 3 matches vs RAFA on grass. And all 3 of those matches came between 08-11. I don’t see Murray grabbing moar than a set. I’d personally take RAFA in 3. Ol’ Rog was probably a little worse in 09 than he was in 08 but they’re comparable in level. All I know is that RAFA matches up infinitely better vs Ol’ Rog than Roddick does. All in all I agree that fatigue wouldn’t be the deciding factor whether or not he makes it through the draw, especially on grass where matches have less long rallies and are moar serve dominant.

I’ve never been one of those guys who thinks RAFA was a lock to win Wimby 09, it’s straight up foolish to assume he’d for sure win. However, I think it’s equally foolish to say that he’d have no chance like a lot of people on the opposite side think (not saying you’re one of them). And that’s the frustrating part, we’ll never know one way or the other. All I know is I wish he planned his schedule better (seriously playing Rotterdam makes anything Timmy has done look like a 4D chess move). Had he planned better, he most likely has a 2 schlem season while still going deep in the remaining 2. But such is life.

 

[Sudacafan]

I don’t think Nadal was unlucky at the net.

 

[King No1e]

I agree except for Djokovic being in a low level at the Us Open 2012, he wasn't

Djokovic wasn't exceptionally bad at USO12 but he wasn't exceptionally good either. I wouldn't like his chances against 2012 Nadal sans-tendonitis.

 

[Gt86]

yes, we can see your happiness at your bubble/delusions being punctured, VBBot.

How is 21 a delusion? Ive just watched the Ao 2022 final again. Are you saying it was fake news?

 

[mrj1813]

2014 Aussie Open Stanimal pretty much kicked his ass. I watched it. The only injury Nadal had was his bruised ego. Nobody was beating Stan that day.

 

[Visionary]

You may be right but I think his last point (on the match point) in AO 2022 final came from his awesome network decision.

 

[ADuck]

Injuries obviously had a greater impact on Nadal's career than either Fed/Djokovic's. And despite what many people say, the main contributing factor of those injuries doesn't come down to his style of play, but his foot. Having to wear special soles which direct his weight away from the deformed part of Nadal's foot has led to him being more prone to injuries in other areas of his body like his back and knees. A hypothetical Nadal without injuries doesn't actually exist unless you also hypothetically take away his foot injury, but it's incredibly likely he would have won more slams if that version did exist. Even if he wasn't a clear favorite for any of the ones he's missed, the sheer accumulation of it adds up, so it ends up being just a matter of probability that he would have won more. And to the people saying the breaks have helped him, well duh, the breaks have helped him recover from injuries and come back injury-free. But the notion that had he had an injury-free career played with minimal breaks he would have ultimately won less slams than his current career has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

[Kralingen]

I am just glad that he can walk.

Is anyone else thankful that Nadal can walk?

I think we take for granted his health and don’t realize how unbelievably lucky he is to not be wheelchair bound, or unable to exercise whatsoever, like many fellow Müller-Weiss sufferers.

It is truly a miracle that he can even go for a simple jog, let alone compete in a professional tennis match.

Let alone win over a THOUSAND of them.

A miracle, I say.

 

[ADuck]

Giving strawman arguments in reply logical arguments says everything

 

[Kralingen]

Giving strawman arguments in reply logical arguments says everything

Assuming this is directed to me,

You said:

the notion that had he had an injury-free career played with minimal breaks he would have ultimately won less slams than his current career has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

My oh my what a closing argument. I’m not saying it’s a straw man… but seems to be made of wheat stalk and have a head, torso, arms and legs.

It could also be a misreading.

So was only replying in kind.

Rafa is an unlucky player with injuries, of that there can be no doubt. It isn’t just the foot or foot correlated injuries (knees, adductor in 2010), he has had multiple serious injuries that seem to be unrelated to the foot (appendicitis, wrist, core strain, back, of course the current rib issue), so in many ways he has been freakishly unlucky. It is no wonder his fanbase is so devoted. Imagine mourning your hero’s injuries nearly annually and living in constant fear of the next one. It really is a miracle that he can play so often, that I genuinely think.

But I don’t know, it’s a bit like asking what if Federer had a two handed backhand or if Djokovic had coherent, modern medical views. We’re talking about a core, defining characteristic of a player’s career here.

 

[ADuck]

Assuming this is directed to me,

You said:

My oh my what a closing argument. I’m not saying it’s a straw man… but seems to be made of wheat stalk and have a head, torso, arms and legs.

It could also be a misreading.

So was only replying in kind.

Rafa is an unlucky player with injuries, of that there can be no doubt. It isn’t just the foot or foot correlated injuries (knees, adductor in 2010), he has had multiple serious injuries that seem to be unrelated to the foot (appendicitis, wrist, core strain, back, of course the current rib issue), so in many ways he has been freakishly unlucky. It is no wonder his fanbase is so devoted. Imagine mourning your hero’s injuries nearly annually and living in constant fear of the next one. It really is a miracle that he can play so often, that I genuinely think.

But I don’t know, it’s a bit like asking what if Federer had a two handed backhand or if Djokovic had coherent, modern medical views. We’re talking about a core, defining characteristic of a player’s career here.

Not sure how what I said there could be a strawman when it is a fact that people have made that argument on the forum before. If I was directly talking/replying to you when you had never made that argument then I would agree that it would be a strawman, but that post is not directed at you specifically or any one person.

I'll add that there's no such thing as an injury-free or 100% healthy player. No player that I know of has gone through career without those problems, but it's not incorrect to make a comparison and say Nadal has been less fortunate than Federer/Djokovic. I'd argue it's more like asking what if Federer was the same age as Djokovic/Nadal. It's not clear whether a one-handed backhand has negatively affected Roger's career and I'd say overall it's been very beneficial to him.

 

[abmk]

Nadal had to retire after injuring in the beginning of the 4th, when he was leading 2-1. And 2014 Nadal was better than his 2018 self. Actually, the Nadal-Cilic rivalry is very loopsided in favor of Nadal. He beat Cilic even in 2015 in indoor hard.

Cilic was already up a break in the 4th set before Nadal got hampered.
Nadal retired down 0-2 in the 5th set.

AO 14 was honestly end of prime Nadal.
USO 14 nadal wouldn't be much better than AO 18 nadal.
And USO 14 Cilic was his best tournament.

 

[abmk]

How is 21 a delusion? Ive just watched the Ao 2022 final again. Are you saying it was fake news?

I was talking about your utterly delusional delusions re: nadal's form in AO 14 - 4R/QF, before getting hampered vs Stan - thinking nadal was playng better than Djoko at that AO.

your further mega delusions of nadal almost certainly winning these tournaments

" Of the above Nadal almost certainly wins w2019 Ao 2014 USo 2012 uso 2014 ao 2011 and throw in USO 2018 as well . "

hence I said your utterly delusional VBBot delusions have been punctured.

nadal wins 1 or this out of all those ->

https://www.****************.com/attachments/giphy-gif.370200/

yes, that one's from AO 2014 QF vs dimi. Like I've said before, I've watched more tennis in some months than you in your entire life.

 

[T007]

Primedal is generally agreed to have been from 2008-2014.

In this time...
On grass:

• He didn’t even play at Wimbledon ‘09 through injury, missing the opportunity to play a weaker Federer or Roddick/Murray. He won the 2 Wimbledons either side of this in 2008 and 2010.
• During his 2012 match against a zoning ballbasher Rosol who couldn’t miss, he sustained an injury to the extent that he was immediately out for the next 8 months

He missed 3 hard court slams altogether:

• 2012 US Open, in which Djokovic was at a far lower level than in 2011 and Federer didn’t even make the final. Nadal reached the 3 other US finals in this period (2010-13)
• 2013 Aussie Open. Nadal reached the final of the Aussie Opens in 2012 and 2014, won Indian Wells as soon as he returned to hard court in 2013, and beat Djokovic in their outdoor HC matches in 2013
• 2014 US Open which was Upset Open; neither Federer or Djokovic reached the final

He sustained injury at 3 hard court slams:

• Retired against Murray at the Aussie Open in 2010. Nadal was defending his title and comfortably won the other HC slam in 2010.
• Lost a match with a hamstring injury (imo one of the rarest and unluckiest injuries in tennis) vs his then-pigeon Ferrer at the 2011 AO. Peakovic would have been a huge challenge but Nadal had won the previous HC slam match vs Djokovic comfortably and before the mental block set in during the clay season, he ran Djokovic close in their next HC matches despite serving at 41% at IW (plus Primedal was always better at Bo5 than Bo3 on hard court)
• Lost the 2014 AO final, where he got a back injury in the warmup against a guy he’d never lost a set to on HC before (and who he is 19-3 against with the other Ls coming in 2015)

That’s 8 injury-affected slams off-clay in his prime years. Nadal was finalling or winning the majority of the other non-clay slams in this period. No other ATG has had anything close to this injury record in their prime (Djokovic and Federer missed 0 non clay slams with injury in their primes).

Nadal benefitting from 3 nice HC slam draws since 2017 (when in the same period, Federer has benefitted from 2, '17W and '18AO, and Djokovic from 3, '18 USO, '21 AO and '21W) is just luck evening trying to even itself out from his horror prime period.

But he is still net unlucky with non-clay slams in his career.

Not unlucky but was playing poorly. Couldn't sustain his peak level. Losing to David ferrer in AO was not a GOATish thing

 

[MadariKatu]

Cilic was already up a break in the 4th set before Nadal got hampered.
Nadal retired down 0-2 in the 5th set.

AO 14 was honestly end of prime Nadal.
USO 14 nadal wouldn't be much better than AO 18 nadal.
And USO 14 Cilic was his best tournament.

Yeah, but still 2-1 down in sets. My point was that Cilic didn't "beat" Nadal, since he had to retire and got injured while up in the match. Much like vs Delpo in USO 2018. The first 3 sets were insane though, loved the match, especially the tie-break. Cilic is underrated in that tournament.
And yes, 2014 USO was Cilic's best tournament, but given the match-up, and Nadal's record at the USO, I'd like the odds. Not a given for Nadal, but neither for Cilic. It sounds like you'd give him no chance. Even if past his prime, 2014 is not 2015.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

 

[Biotic]

Primedal is generally agreed to have been from 2008-2014.

In this time...
On grass:

• He didn’t even play at Wimbledon ‘09 through injury, missing the opportunity to play a weaker Federer or Roddick/Murray. He won the 2 Wimbledons either side of this in 2008 and 2010.
• During his 2012 match against a zoning ballbasher Rosol who couldn’t miss, he sustained an injury to the extent that he was immediately out for the next 8 months

He missed 3 hard court slams altogether:

• 2012 US Open, in which Djokovic was at a far lower level than in 2011 and Federer didn’t even make the final. Nadal reached the 3 other US finals in this period (2010-13)
• 2013 Aussie Open. Nadal reached the final of the Aussie Opens in 2012 and 2014, won Indian Wells as soon as he returned to hard court in 2013, and beat Djokovic in their outdoor HC matches in 2013
• 2014 US Open which was Upset Open; neither Federer or Djokovic reached the final

He sustained injury at 3 hard court slams:

• Retired against Murray at the Aussie Open in 2010. Nadal was defending his title and comfortably won the other HC slam in 2010.
• Lost a match with a hamstring injury (imo one of the rarest and unluckiest injuries in tennis) vs his then-pigeon Ferrer at the 2011 AO. Peakovic would have been a huge challenge but Nadal had won the previous HC slam match vs Djokovic comfortably and before the mental block set in during the clay season, he ran Djokovic close in their next HC matches despite serving at 41% at IW (plus Primedal was always better at Bo5 than Bo3 on hard court)
• Lost the 2014 AO final, where he got a back injury in the warmup against a guy he’d never lost a set to on HC before (and who he is 19-3 against with the other Ls coming in 2015)

That’s 8 injury-affected slams off-clay in his prime years. Nadal was finalling or winning the majority of the other non-clay slams in this period. No other ATG has had anything close to this injury record in their prime (Djokovic and Federer missed 0 non clay slams with injury in their primes).

Nadal benefitting from 3 nice HC slam draws since 2017 (when in the same period, Federer has benefitted from 2, '17W and '18AO, and Djokovic from 3, '18 USO, '21 AO and '21W) is just luck evening trying to even itself out from his horror prime period.

But he is still net unlucky with non-clay slams in his career.

Bolded = not true

 

[weakera]

Wim 09 - he'd have to go through a draw of Hewitt, Murray, Roddick, Fed. fat chance

 

[MichaelNadal]

IKR

 

[RS]

 

[Amritia]

Can't believe people criticise abmk when he comes up with gems like that.

 

[Newballsplease872]

Laughable thread.

There has never been a luckier sportsperson than Rafael in all sporting history.

Without rigged draws and favorable draws and courts/balls changed on his whims and fancy by the establishment he wouldn't overachieve so much

 

[Newballsplease872]

Wim 09 - he'd have to go through a draw of Hewitt, Murray, Roddick, Fed. fat chance
Wim 12 - just got outplayed by Rosol

AO 13 - lol @ thinking Nadal would have a chance vs djoko unless he was in top form and it'd still be less than 40%
USO 14 - was already past his prime by then. Cilic would've beaten him

AO 10 - was losing to Murray even before injury
AO 11 - would've lost to Djoko anyways
AO 14 - Stan was up a set and a break before nadal injury. Would've likely won anyways
USO 12 - he'd get beaten by Djokovic for sure unless it was in windy conditions. Djoko was rampaging through the draw when it wasn't windy.

Maybe out of all this, he'd win 1
compared to 3 slams he's got in USO 17, USO 19, AO 22 - he's easily benefitted overall.

Great post

 

[Mike Sams]

Nadal struggled in the grass exhos leading to Wimbledon 2009. He had some issue with his knees hence pulling out.
He probably wouldn't have made it past the first few rounds.

 

[abmk]

Can't believe people criticise abmk when he comes up with gems like that.

Oh, I see another VBBot is delusional to think nadal wouldn't have it extremely tough to go draw like that just like that at Wimbledon - especially after getting his a** kicked by Soderling at RG 09.

 

[jl809]

Laughable thread.

There has never been a luckier sportsperson than Rafael in all sporting history.

Without rigged draws and favorable draws and courts/balls changed on his whims and fancy by the establishment he wouldn't overachieve so much

I do love this forum

 

[Amritia]

Oh, I see another VBBot is delusional to think nadal wouldn't have it extremely tough to go draw like that just like that at Wimbledon - especially after getting his a** kicked by Soderling at RG 09.

If fully fit, he would beat everyone in that draw you listed. The Wimbledon 2009 final quality was decent, but neither player played to Nadal's prime level.
The RG 2009 loss was a bit of an anomaly, you can't extrapolate from that.

 

[Forgive Me Father]

This is known, right?

 

[crimson87]

Nah... Nadal was not unlucky at all specially at the US Open. those 2017 and 2019 draws...

 

[Third Serve]

12-17 was his post grass prime though. I’d say 06-11 was his grass prime. Heck, 09 was in between the 2 years he won the whole thing. Hewitt was a good GCer, but he was almost half a decade past his prime by 09 and he actually had a pretty soft draw that year. Stepanek was the first decent player he faced and he went 5 with him IIRC. I honestly think he takes out Hewitt in 4. I agree that Roddick would have been a real test, but I’ll take RAFA playing at/near his best over Roddick on any surface. This one probably goes 5 either way. As far as Murray goes, he’s won 1 set in 3 matches vs RAFA on grass. And all 3 of those matches came between 08-11. I don’t see Murray grabbing moar than a set. I’d personally take RAFA in 3. Ol’ Rog was probably a little worse in 09 than he was in 08 but they’re comparable in level. All I know is that RAFA matches up infinitely better vs Ol’ Rog than Roddick does. All in all I agree that fatigue wouldn’t be the deciding factor whether or not he makes it through the draw, especially on grass where matches have less long rallies and are moar serve dominant.

I’ve never been one of those guys who thinks RAFA was a lock to win Wimby 09, it’s straight up foolish to assume he’d for sure win. However, I think it’s equally foolish to say that he’d have no chance like a lot of people on the opposite side think (not saying you’re one of them). And that’s the frustrating part, we’ll never know one way or the other. All I know is I wish he planned his schedule better (seriously playing Rotterdam makes anything Timmy has done look like a 4D chess move). Had he planned better, he most likely has a 2 schlem season while still going deep in the remaining 2. But such is life.

2012-2017 are after his grass prime but they do help to demonstrate his overall weaknesses on that surface against natural grass-courters and big servers/hitters and I did cite other instances in his genuine prime years when he struggled against those types of players:

2006 vs Kendrick
2007 vs. Youzhny
2007 vs. Soderling
2008 vs. Gulbis
2010 vs. Haase
2010 vs. Petzschner
2011 vs. Delpo

All of these matches either went five or came within one tiebreak of going to five, and all of them were before the QFs. Nadal is just vulnerable in the first week of Wimbledon regardless of the year: when he dipped even further in 2012, he started losing these matches rather than winning them in 4/5, but the fact of the matter is that he’s far from unbeatable at this stage of the tournament. I actually think he’d have looked a lot better in the last few rounds of 2012-2017 as opposed to the first few given he tends to improve across the tournament as the grass gets more worn and bouncy.

Nadal was also far from unbeatable during most of the season (he was very passive throughout the clay season as a whole compared to 2008 even excluding the Soderling match and his FH was very loopy and lacked a lot of the bite that it had in the previous season), which seems to suggest, to me, that he probably wouldn’t have been at his best form anyway regardless of the injury. Don’t know how far off his best that would be, but I don’t see him replicating 2008.

I think he goes five with both Hewitt and Stepanek (definitely Stepanek because his style of play would probably cause Nadal fits on slick grass; Nadal hates playing those types of guys on slick grass—Hewitt would have to get to five sets on his own level since his style doesn’t scream natural grasscourter, but he was in pretty good form that Wimbledon and I bet he’d give Nadal trouble on that surface). He might lose to Roddick in the QFs—again, that type of big-serving game is tough for Nadal at Wimbledon, although the grass by this point is a little more favorable to him than first-week grass. If Nadal wins, it’s in five, but I wouldn’t bet on a Nadal win. I think he beats Murray in four based on his SF performances in 2010 and 2011—Murray was quite similar between the 2009-2011 SFs though maybe the best in 2009. Then there's the final against Fed and even despite what happened in 2008 I'd still have to favor Fed here unless Nadal replicates his 2008 level. There's just too many places in the draw where Nadal could lose that I feel like he'd have to be at his best to win this Wimbledon, and somehow I really don't see him repeating 2008 given his overall form in 2009 even before the injury.

I also got the impression that the 2009 courts were probably the quickest since 2004, based on the surprising success of big servers and old-school grass-courters that Wimbledon, so I feel they’d be slightly more favorable to Fed than the 2005-2008 courts but this is a much more subjective viewpoint and not really a hill I’ll die on.

 

[Newballsplease872]

I do love this forum

I'm sorry I don't speak gibberish.

Quote someone who does

 

[The_Order]

Nah... Nadal was not unlucky at all specially at the US Open. those 2017 and 2019 draws...

His 2019 US Open was tougher than Fed's AO18...

 

[abmk]

If fully fit, he would beat everyone in that draw you listed. The Wimbledon 2009 final quality was decent, but neither player played to Nadal's prime level.
The RG 2009 loss was a bit of an anomaly, you can't extrapolate from that.

Wimbledon 09 final fed was in the same ballpark as Wimbledon 08 final fed. Roddick a little below. The Wim 09 final is severely under-rated by those saying muh Roddick or those who don't understand importance of serving well enough.
Fed's serving a little better in Wim 09 final, ground game a little better in Wim 08 final, returning honestly a little less worse in Wim 09 final (he missed returning 1/3rd of nadal's 2nd serves. again notice the wording less worse meaning not good in either final).
Nadal would lose to either Roddick or Fed of that Wimbledon unless he was in top form AND top confidence.
With Soderling loss, top confidence would't be there and no guarantee of top form either.
Besides the draw was tough and deep as a whole before the final itself, even if you think he beats each one of them individually before the final.

 

[abmk]

Nadal was also far from unbeatable during most of the season (he was very passive throughout the clay season as a whole compared to 2008 even excluding the Soderling match and his FH was very loopy and lacked a lot of the bite that it had in the previous season), which seems to suggest, to me, that he probably wouldn’t have been at his best form anyway regardless of the injury. Don’t know how far off his best that would be, but I don’t see him replicating 2008.

I don't think Nadal was very loopy or passive in the clay season. he played well in Monte Carlo, barca and Rome.
struggled with conditions at Madrid to an extent. dasco, djoko and fed.
less than 2008, but not as much as you are making it out to be.

At RG 2009, first match was just decent by his standards, 2nd one was very good and 3rd match, he actually GOATed vs Hewitt bringing back flashes of RG 2008.

I also got the impression that the 2009 courts were probably the quickest since 2004, based on the surprising success of big servers and old-school grass-courters that Wimbledon, so I feel they’d be slightly more favorable to Fed than the 2005-2008 courts but this is a much more subjective viewpoint and not really a hill I’ll die on.

they were faster because of the dry, hot conditions.
that showed in the success of big servers/old school grass courters.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I don't think Nadal was very loopy or passive in the clay season. he played well in Monte Carlo, barca and Rome.
struggled with conditions at Madrid to an extent. dasco, djoko and fed.
less than 2008, but not as much as you are making it out to be.

At RG 2009, first match was just decent by his standards, 2nd one was very good and 3rd match, he actually GOATed vs Hewitt bringing back flashes of RG 2008.

Everyone GOATS against Hewitt lol

 

[Gt86]

I was talking about your utterly delusional delusions re: nadal's form in AO 14 - 4R/QF, before getting hampered vs Stan - thinking nadal was playng better than Djoko at that AO.

your further mega delusions of nadal almost certainly winning these tournaments

" Of the above Nadal almost certainly wins w2019 Ao 2014 USo 2012 uso 2014 ao 2011 and throw in USO 2018 as well . "

hence I said your utterly delusional VBBot delusions have been punctured.

nadal wins 1 or this out of all those ->

https://www.****************.com/attachments/giphy-gif.370200/

yes, that one's from AO 2014 QF vs dimi. Like I've said before, I've watched more tennis in some months than you in your entire life.

Try watching tournaments before posting lol. I am correct in my assessment. You sre just being salty and not posting what actually happened. Nadal was by far the best player at AO 2014. Sampras was there and said what h saw from Nadal was the greatest performances he had ever seen. Ill take Sampras opinion over yours. Not only does he actually watch tennis, he also played the game and was pretty damn good. Won 14 Majors.

 

[abmk]

Try watching tournaments before posting lol. I am correct in my assessment. You sre just being salty and not posting what actually happened. Nadal was by far the best player at AO 2014. Sampras was there and said what h saw from Nadal was the greatest performances he had ever seen. Ill take Sampras opinion over yours. Not only does he actually watch tennis, he also played the game and was pretty damn good. Won 14 Majors.

I watched the tournament and I've shown it, unlike your mega muppet descriptions.
Like I said, I've watched more tennis in a few months than you in your entire life.

nadal by far best player at AO 2014

chal maha chutiye^pappu
He wasn't even 2nd best.

Stan - best
Djokovic - 2nd best

also Sampras didn't say that from what I see in this article.

Pete Sampras stunned by 'incredible' Rafael Nadal

Pete Sampras calls Rafael Nadal "incredible" after seeing the world number one play live for the first time.

www.bbc.com

post a link if you can or I am going to assume your VBBot delusional mind made that up.

 

[NatF]

Everyone GOATS against Hewitt lol

 

[Gt86]

nadal by far best player at AO 2014

chal maha chutiye^maha chutiye
He wasn't even 2nd best.

Stan - best
Djokovic - 2nd best

also Sampras didn't say that from what I see in this article.

Pete Sampras stunned by 'incredible' Rafael Nadal

Pete Sampras calls Rafael Nadal "incredible" after seeing the world number one play live for the first time.

www.bbc.com

post a link if you can or I am going to assume your VBBot delusional mind made that up.

The BBC lol. Try harder.
Sampras made it clear Nadals perfoemance was the best he had seen. Like i say Sampras version of events is more notable than yours given you clearly never watched the event and appear to not watch tennis much if at all. You should watch AO2022 final. Historically important. It is on you tube now. The full match . Sit back and enjoy.

 

[abmk]

The BBC lol. Try harder.
Sampras made it clear Nadals perfoemance was the best he had seen. Like i say Sampras version of events is more notable than yours given you clearly never watched the event and appear to not watch tennis much if at all. You should watch AO2022 final. Historically important. It is on you tube now. The full match . Sit back and enjoy.

so you got no link of Sampras saying that.
To conclude you are not just delusional, but a blatant liar.
As the saying goes -> liar, liar pants on fire.

 

[abmk]

don't forget ancient Hewitt draggin Djoko at Oly 12, beating delpo in USO 13
hewitt nearly beating nadal at hamburg 07
oh and nadal, djokovic, sampras, agassi having combined 0 bagels vs him.
nadal played very good in R2 at 2009 RG and GOATed in R3.
that's reality irrespectively of ignorant or salty people saying otherwise.

Nadal didn't play as well vs Hewitt in RG 2006 and RG 2010. (or even RG 07)

 

[MichaelNadal]

He had 4 great weeks in his career lol

 

[NatF]

He had 4 great weeks in his career lol

Number one for 80 weeks, top five for multiple years etc...but sure lol.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Number one for 80 weeks, top five for multiple years etc...but sure lol.

4 weeks bestie