Nadal will win a Slam on hardcourts and Federer will not win a Slam on clay

[halalula1234]

i think fed can get the french open but only one and nadal will win hardcourts too

 

[garcia_doomer]

Terrible post, awful, dumb...

 

[Zaragoza]

Lets see, 2 slams are played on hardcourts and 1 slam is played on clay. That kind f doubles Nadals chances compared to Federer's, no?

Well if there were 2 slams played on clay and 1 slam played on hardcourts it would be harder for Nadal to win a slam on hardcourts but he could have won 9 slams at the age of 22. That way I wouldn´t care how many slams he could win on hardcourts since he could win many more slams and apparently the number of slams won is the only thing that matters for some people.
Other players clearly benefit from the fact that there are 2 slams played on hardcourts so they can win 2 slams per year on one surface which is Nadal´s worst surface as well. So at least don´t complain that Nadal has 2 chances per year to win on his worst surface. I´ve said it multiple times, the number of slam titles is misleading and it benefits the hardcourt specialists.

 

[Zaragoza]

Rafa had a pretty easy draw at the US

he destroyed Murray on Grass

but Murray is smart, he didn't just beat Rafa, he mentally destroyed him

Murray is going to win a HC slam for sure, one day

Rafa, a great player, has to overcome Djokovic, Murray and Roger, who are all better on hard courts- it will not be easy... if Rafa does it, it will really cement his place in history

Nadal has been the semifinalist, runner up or winner on every Slam/Masters Series/Olympics played this year (that´s 7 consecutive big events making the semifinals or better). Nadal wasn´t mentally destroyed by Murray, it was a close match where Murray played well and Nadal was far from his best form. I think Nadal was a little burnt out at the USO and the match was still close. It was nothing like their match at Wimbledon where Nadal completely owned Murray. The 5-1 in the head-to-head means that Nadal is a bad matchup for Murray, not the other way. Nadal had much better results than Murray this year on hardcourts and he is at the moment the better player on hardcourts too. Murray can beat anyone on hardcourts any given day but it doesn´t make him better in the big picture. He´s also more prone to early upsets than any of the top 3 (we could see it in the last USO as well). Murray is a threat on hardcourts but he is not better than any of the top 3. It´s very easy to check out the results of each player.

 

[Tennis_Maestro]

Boring thread.

There are 2 slams on hardcourt compared to 1 on clay and Nadal has more years left in him, obvious prediction.

This Nadal and Federer argument is also getting old, accept they are both great player's with different qualities to their game.

Over.

 

[Tennis_Maestro]

Nadal has been the semifinalist, runner up or winner on every Slam/Masters Series/Olympics played this year (that´s 7 consecutive big events making the semifinals or better). Nadal wasn´t mentally destroyed by Murray, it was a close match where Murray played well and Nadal was far from his best form. I think Nadal was a little burnt out at the USO and the match was still close. It was nothing like their match at Wimbledon where Nadal completely owned Murray. The 5-1 in the head-to-head means that Nadal is a bad matchup for Murray, not the other way. Nadal had much better results than Murray this year on hardcourts and he is at the moment the better player on hardcourts too. Murray can beat anyone on hardcourts any given day but it doesn´t make him better in the big picture. He´s also more prone to early upsets than any of the top 3 (we could see it in the last USO as well). Murray is a threat on hardcourts but he is not better than any of the top 3. It´s very easy to check out the results of each player.

More prone to upsets? Didn't Djokovich lose to Safin in the 2nd round of Wimbledon this year in straight sets?

Accept and respect Murray as a top player, he is World Class and you will see that in 2009.

 

[Rv.D]

Nadal is 22 and improving on every surface. this year he made his best results in the AO and the USO (semifinals), winner in Toronto and Beijing, runner up in Miami...next step is to win a hardcourt Slam!!!
Fed cant beat Nadal at RG and he is already 27. Other players like Djokovic, Andreev, Schwank and Bellucci will get better and Federer will not have the chance to play the final. I feel Federer has wasted his chances to win in Paris but Nadal is much younger and keeps improving on every surface. I am calling it now. Nadal will win a Slam on hardcourts and Fed will not win a Slam on clay. Say what you want. Time will prove me right!

Way to go dude!!!

I agree completely...Nadal haters say what you want...

 

[zagor]

Well if there were 2 slams played on clay and 1 slam played on hardcourts it would be harder for Nadal to win a slam on hardcourts but he could have won 9 slams at the age of 22. That way I wouldn´t care how many slams he could win on hardcourts since he could win many more slams and apparently the number of slams won is the only thing that matters for some people.
Other players clearly benefit from the fact that there are 2 slams played on hardcourts so they can win 2 slams per year on one surface which is Nadal´s worst surface as well. So at least don´t complain that Nadal has 2 chances per year to win on his worst surface. I´ve said it multiple times, the number of slam titles is misleading and it benefits the hardcourt specialists.

Yes,2 slams on HC gives advantage to tennis greats who prefer that surface as they can pile up slams there but the thing is that since HC is the most important surface in tennis(and has been for the last 20 years or so,the makority of the tournaments and 2 slams are on that surface)the field is overall most deep there(especially in this era which is a hardcourt era IMO with clay and grass specialists almost extinct)and it's the toughest surface to continously dominate or win on.Atleast that's my opinion.

 

[zagor]

Roger can 100% win the FO, but only if Nadal is not on the other side of the court.

So basicly the Fed fans are hoping either
#1 Nadal has injury and Roger wins with out facing Nadal

I personally would NEVER hope to see injury come to any tennis player,regardless if I'm a Fed fan or not.

Boring thread.

There are 2 slams on hardcourt compared to 1 on clay and Nadal has more years left in him, obvious prediction.

This Nadal and Federer argument is also getting old, accept they are both great player's with different qualities to their game.

Over.

Yeah,I agree with the OP as well here even if I generally don't like his posts and the manner in which he often puts down Fed.Hope Fed proves me wrong but I think he wasted his best chances at winning the FO in 2006 and 2007 and Nadal is steadily improving on HC every year.

 

[WildVolley]

Nadal is looking almost unbeatable on clay. But don't forget. Nadal seems a little more susceptible to injury than Roger. That could be very well enough to give Roger a good chance at getting a title.

 

[tennis-hero]

Nadal isn't invincible on clay

Pete lost on grass in 96

you never know in tennis, i'd never write off Roger on clay... i think his game suits clay more then hard

its agreed if anyone is going to dethrone Rafa at RG it is (possibly was) going to be Roger.... either that, or Rafa loses form

yeah he sucked at RG 08, but... i don't think Roger is a quitter

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Nadal might lose to someone at Roland Garros someday. It won't be Federer. Most likely Djokovic and possibly Del Potro. It depends on how good his form is. It was awesome at Davis Cup.

 

[greg09]

from here on in, nadals career will be going down-hill. BOOK IT!!!!!