Should Nadal be mad?

I don't think he was "mad" I think he was more irritated/annoyed that they were basically forcing play when it seemed like it wasn't possible. I think the media blew it out of context from reality. Yes, he got broken and is down 0-3, but I don't think he's "mad" necessarily. I think the media is running with this cause they have nothing else to write cause everything got cancelled. I really hate the media, just over sensationalize things and collect a paycheck.
 
cork_screw said:
I don't think he was "mad" I think he was more irritated/annoyed that they were basically forcing play when it seemed like it wasn't possible. I think the media blew it out of context from reality. Yes, he got broken and is down 0-3, but I don't think he's "mad" necessarily. I think the media is running with this cause they have nothing else to write cause everything got cancelled. I really hate the media, just over sensationalize things and collect a paycheck.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of your post.
 
Bartelby said:
Commandante Nadal went against his non-rebeliious nature, so it was a big deal.
Click to expand...

He will tear down the ATP limb from limb :)
nadal.jpg
 
The US open is quite a gritty surface. A bit of moisture isn't too bad. I've played on the same surface in pelting rain just as a laugh. Though I admit I'm not as fast as the pros.
 
Bendex said:
The US open is quite a gritty surface. A bit of moisture isn't too bad. I've played on the same surface in pelting rain just as a laugh. Though I admit I'm not as fast as the pros.
Click to expand...

LOL :)

I played in a lightning storm once. Nothing happened to me either.
 
How the hell is it fair for all the players when some get the chance to rest and others don't??

Jim Curley, the Open’s tournament director, said that officials intended to finish the tournament on time. If the men’s fourth-round matches finish Thursday, he said, such a time frame remains realistic.

Curley did not rule out having either the men or women play twice in the same day — unthinkable as that might be. He also said men’s matches would remain best-of-five-sets, even if they play four matches in four days.

“It’s fair for all the players,” he said. “They’re all in the same situation. I don’t think it’s a safety issue. I think it’s a fitness issue.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/sports/tennis/us-open-the-matches-pile-up-as-rain-wins-again.html?_r=2&ref=sports
Click to expand...

I hope Muller beats Rafa. :cry:
 
magnut said:
Nadal is not the problem. I am not a Rafa freak (great player though) but he should recieve a giant wave of graditude by both the players and the fans. He has taken a tough stand against the machine that is killing the sport. He basically called it out...."its always about the money isnt it". He gained nothing from this stance and by bringing it to public awareness he puts himself in a tough position with the all powerful in the machine. It takes a lot of guts to call out the USTA and ATP to a public audience.

THANK YOU Rafeal Nadal for making a stand and making an effort to protect the sport. You showed me a lot this tournament. Things more important than just winning another title.
Click to expand...

(This answers the thread question 100%)
 
I don't blame Nadal for acting this way. In fact all of them. They are trying to compete at the highest level possible in the latter stages of a Grand Slam, and be messed around like this, when it could be avoided shows how valued they are in the eyes of the powers that be.

First all these retirements, and now the rain issue....great tournament.
 
Thank god Rafa Roddick and Murray have said something here, the situation is ridiculous, their livelihoods could be lost in one slip moving at full speed for a ball. Even at my inferior level it's dangerous on wet hard courts, I've really hurt myself before.

The tournament organisers were being utterly insane trying to get tennis played in those conditions, and jeopardising the players who make them their money shines a terrible light on them personally and professionally.
 
fps said:
Thank god Rafa Roddick and Murray have said something here, the situation is ridiculous, their livelihoods could be lost in one slip moving at full speed for a ball. Even at my inferior level it's dangerous on wet hard courts, I've really hurt myself before.

The tournament organisers were being utterly insane trying to get tennis played in those conditions, and jeopardising the players who make them their money shines a terrible light on them personally and professionally.
Click to expand...

(And now the tournament director is insisting on finishing on Sunday and players playing 2 five-setters in one day if required. So looks like the complaint only spurred the machine on!)
 
Should Nadal be mad?

NO. he should be quiet. and so should the other whining spoiled brats...
 
SLD76 said:
so they are spoiled for not wanting to risk injury in order to satisfy the greed of the USTA.

Ok.
Click to expand...

im already breaking out in tears here... what a emotional speech you made there!!!!
 
Murray said the balls were soggy. Well you can't play with soggy balls and that reflects the state of the ground which could never pass health and safety rules in this age we live in whereby you are so limited to do many things anyway because of this ruling
 
rafan said:
Murray said the balls were soggy. Well you can't play with soggy balls and that reflects the state of the ground which could never pass health and safety rules in this age we live in whereby you are so limited to do many things anyway because of this ruling
Click to expand...

....what?:confused:
 
SLD76 said:
why thank you. Id like to thank my parents, and my coaches, and all the little people.
Click to expand...

An oscar for you on the part of "low\middle class schmuck who feels for millionaires getting paid to do their job" on the Movie " How i worry about them instead of myself - Directors cut"
 
SLD76 said:
so they are spoiled for not wanting to risk injury in order to satisfy the greed of the USTA.

Ok.
Click to expand...

These are supposedly tennis pros, they practice every day for years. They should be able to hit aces and return of serves without running. In fact some pros dive and slide. Their sponsors should make raincoats so the pros can get out in the rain. I want tennis!!!!
 
Gorecki said:
An oscar for you on the part of "low\middle class schmuck who feels for millionaires getting paid to do their job" on the Movie " How i worry about them instead of myself - Directors cut"
Click to expand...

In order to do their job they need a (mostly) dry court to play on. The USTA didn't provide that for them and yet they expected them to go out and play, risking injury in the process, not to mention that the tennis would have been of low quality.

Nadal,Roddick,Murray,Ferrer(all the major players still in 4th round) said that the courts were wet(danger of slipping) and Murray even said that the balls had soaked up water.

Read up on the situation. Everybody is siding with the players on this one and blaming the USTA for its incompetence in organizing this slam.
 
namelessone said:
It is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Of course it isn't. It shows that the only surface Nadal is actually consistent on, is clay. Other than that its pretty much in the air( except to an extent grass but then the season isn't long and Nadal hasn't defended any of his titles there despite liking the surface).
 
CMM said:
I don't care if he wins or not
Click to expand...

Sorry, don't buy that, you're a Nadal fan so of course you want him to win. I doubt you'd be this passionate about it if Federer/Djokovic/Tsonga had to potentailly play 4 days in a row(which is fine, everyone here is biased one war or the other).

CMM said:
I want them to have equal chances. If the top half gets a day of rest and the bottom half plays 4 days in a row then it is not fair. .
Click to expand...

USO has never really been fair even at those times the event at was "dry" and rain didn't wreck the schedule simply because of Super(Stupid) Saturday which favours the player who played the 1st SF . Furthemore what is even more stupid about is that a high profile match usually plays out second. Be honest, were you outraged last year that Nadal played Youzhny first(a complete mismatch at that point of time) while Fed and Novak were scheduled second and battled it out in a five setter all the while knowing they have to face fresh Nadal tomorrow? Now Novak got lucky it rained after and he recovered completely for the match, otherwise if they played on Sunday he would have probably goten bageled or something.

CMM said:
This happened to Ferrero in 2003 and he had nothing left for the final. If players keep on accepting this nothing will change.
Click to expand...

Yes JCF did look drained in that final but while I like the guy's game he's no Nadal, neither when it comes to stamina nor mental toughness. Nadal played almost every day in 2007 Wimbledon and still played like a beast in the final which could have easily gone his way, he also recovered after that thriller with Nando to beat Fed in 2009 AO final(although he did have a day of rest, his SF was still brutal).

So writing Nadal off because of the schedule is premature, especially given that if Fed gets past Tsonga Nadal will in all likelyhood play a 1st SF which could somewhat balance the fact that he had less days off.
 
Last edited:
mandy01 said:
Of course it isn't. It shows that the only surface Nadal is actually consistent on, is clay. Other than that its pretty much in the air( except to an extent grass but then the season isn't long and Nadal hasn't defended any of his titles there despite liking the surface).
Click to expand...

Consistency doesn't have anything to do with DEFENDING titles, but winning as much as possible on said surface, or even reaching latter stages.

If Nadal won only in odd years certain smaller HC events(and thus defending none of them), he would have a buttload of HC titles yet NO HC DEFENSE.

If Rafa entered tournies with mickey mouse draws like Bangkok/Tokio each year, without exception, and defended them 3-4-5 years straight without pause(while failing to win MS/GS against the top HC guys), would that add credence to his HC cred?

I seriously doubt it.

If they wanted to show Rafa's propensity towards one surface, they should have pointed out nr. of HC TITLES, not how many title HC defenses he failed.
Out of 60 titles, 14 have come on non-clay surfaces. So 14 possible titles defenses. But even that number gets lower if we look at the facts(the situations where Nadal was actually back next year to defend):

2005:

Madrid Masters - won it. Failed to do so in 2006 by losing in QF. One
Canada- won it. Failed to do so in 2006 by losing in 3R. Two
China Open - won it. Didn't enter next year so he couldn't defend.

2006:

Dubai - won it. Failed to do in 2007 by losing in QF. Three

2007:

IW - won it. Failed to defend it in 2008. Four

2008:

Canada - won it. Failed to do so in 2009. Five
Olympics - won it. We'll see if he "defends" it in 2012.
WB - won it. Couldn't come back next year due to injury.
Queens -won. Couldn't come back next year due to injury.

2009:

AO - won it. Lost in QF to Andy in 2010. Six.

2010:

WB-won it. Lost in F in 2011. Seven
USO and Tokio- we'll see if he defends them.

In six years at the top, Rafa had only SEVEN opportunities(6 HC, 1 grass) to actually come and defend his non-clay titles. That says a lot. Not to mention the level of competition, with the exception of Dubai, the rest were HC MS(and there are MANY guys better than Rafa on HC) or GS(WB 2011 failed defense).

It's kinda funny that a guy like Rafa, who wins 1-2 non clay titles per year, gets berated for not defending(exactly those) next year.

A guy like Murray, with far more HC ability, playing on his fav surface 60% of the time, has defended a HC title 2 TIMES(if his wiki page is right): Canada 2009-2010 and San Jose 2006-2007.Djoko defended on HC 3 TIMES(Dubai twice, Beijing once).
 
Last edited:
namelessone said:
It is irrelevant. If I win that(or those if we are talking multiple tourneys) HC/grass tourney once in every two years, I have won a couple of off-clay tournies yet I never defended any of them. But I still have the titles from the other years.

It's not that surprising when you consider the fact that 60% of the tour is played on Nadal's worst surface and that Rafa rarely plays in mickey mouse tournies.

Doha - a 250 but guys like Fed and Davydenko play it regularly.
The HC MS series - best of the best as far as HC there, very tough to win, even tougher to defend.
AO and USO - GS, nuff' said.

If Rafa played some smaller tourney EVERY YEAR since 05', like say China Open/Bangkok/Tokio, won it and failed to defend I would raise my eyebrows. But he doesn't. Over the years he has played in some small HC tourneys but I don't think he returned to any of them except China Open(and he didn't play it in consecutive years, 2005-2007-2009, winning in 2005),Dubai(2006-2007), Chennai(2007-2008 ), Rotterdam(2008-2009), Doha(2009-2011).

And out of these only Dubai is the only failed defense, as in WINNING it and coming back the next year and failing to do so.

And I certainly don't think Rafa would improve his HC status if he defended one of these smaller tournies once.Even Fed I think defended clay titles only once or twice, in Hamburg pre-Nadal era and Estoril I think. And I don't think anyone doubts Fed's clay abilities.

If you want to prove lack of domination over all surfaces, you go with total nr of titles or finals and such. Rafa has about 80% on clay.

It seems kinda funny to me b!tching that a guy failed to defend his titles off clay when he has won so few of them. Doesn't the fact that he won so few of these tell you something?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Nadal and Federer play mostly the same tournaments except Nadal plays more clay events and Federer will play in Switzerland or whatever. I disagree with you in that Nadal never defending a title off clay AND the fact that he has won over 70% of his overall titles on clay show he has not dominated the way a former number one in the world should have. You can spin it any way you like but never defending off clay in his entire career is a weakness in his overall resume.
 
Consistency doesn't have anything to do with DEFENDING titles


Umm....doesnt it though?

I mean isnt part of Rafa's greatness the fact that he is nigh unbeatable at the French Open?

Inst the reason we call him the Clay Goat because year in year out he wins every clay tournament( 2011 aside)???

Ummm, defending titles sorta is the highest benchmark of consistency.
 
namelessone said:
Consistency doesn't have anything to do with DEFENDING titles, but winning as much as possible on said surface, or even reaching latter stages.

If Nadal won only in odd years certain smaller HC events(and thus defending none of them), he would have a buttload of HC titles yet NO HC DEFENSE.

If Rafa entered tournies with mickey mouse draws like Bangkok/Tokio each year, without exception, and defended them 3-4-5 years straight without pause(while failing to win MS/GS against the top HC guys), would that add credence to his HC cred?

I seriously doubt it.

If they wanted to show Rafa's propensity towards one surface, they should have pointed out nr. of HC TITLES, not how many title HC defenses he failed.
Out of 60 titles, 14 have come on non-clay surfaces. So 14 possible titles defenses. But even that number gets lower if we look at the facts(the situations where Nadal was actually back next year to defend):

2005:

Madrid Masters - won it. Failed to do so in 2006 by losing in QF. One
Canada- won it. Failed to do so in 2006 by losing in 3R. Two
China Open - won it. Didn't enter next year so he couldn't defend.-Yes he could. He didnt enter.--three

2006:

Dubai - won it. Failed to do in 2007 by losing in QF. Three

2007:

IW - won it. Failed to defend it in 2008. Four

2008:

Canada - won it. Failed to do so in 2009. Five
Olympics - won it. We'll see if he "defends" it in 2012.
WB - won it. Couldn't come back next year due to injury.irrelevant--7
Queens -won. Couldn't come back next year due to injury.irrelevant--8

2009:

AO - won it. Lost in QF to Andy in 2010. Six.

2010:

WB-won it. Lost in F in 2011. Seven
USO and Tokio- we'll see if he defends them.

In six years at the top, Rafa had only SEVEN TEN opportunities(6 HC, 1 grass) to actually come and defend his non-clay titles. That says a lot. Not to mention the level of competition, with the exception of Dubai, the rest were HC MS(and there are MANY guys better than Rafa on HC) or GS(WB 2011 failed defense).

It's kinda funny that a guy like Rafa, who wins 1-2 non clay titles per year, gets berated for not defending(exactly those) next year.

A guy like Murray, with far more HC ability, playing on his fav surface 60% of the time, has defended a HC title 2 TIMES(if his wiki page is right): Canada 2009-2010 and San Jose 2006-2007.Djoko defended on HC 3 TIMES(Dubai twice, Beijing once).
Click to expand...

Real numbers in red.
 
cc0509 said:
What are you talking about? Nadal and Federer play mostly the same tournaments except Nadal plays more clay events and Federer will play in Switzerland or whatever. I disagree with you in that Nadal never defending a title off clay AND the fact that he has won over 70% of his overall titles on clay show he has not dominated the way a former number one in the world should have. You can spin it any way you like but never defending off clay in his entire career is a weakness in his overall resume.
Click to expand...

Eh, to be honest, Sampras was number 1 in the world for many years whilst being invisible on clay.

There was a thread earlier( and I know you posted in it) basically comparing Pete as a mirror of Rafa and vice versa. They both racked up points on their favorite surfaces in order to ride out the part of the season where their game was neutralized. For pete, he dominated grass and HC . For Rafa he gobbles up every clay title he can and does well at Wimbly. But Rafa is much better on hard than Pete ever was on clay.

Nobody questioned Pete's #1 ranking even though he barely did anything on clay his whole career. Though it probably would have been questioned had he not won all the slams he did.

But the fact remains, compared to Federer, both are made to look like incomplete players because of Roger's consistency and proficiency on all surfaces.


Consistency:

making the finals of the FO( the surface least kind to your game) 4 years in a row, making the semis 5 years in a row.
Winning a clay title 3 years in a row.
 
Last edited:
zagor said:
Sorry, don't buy that, you're a Nadal fan so of course you want him to win. I doubt you'd be this passionate about it if Federer/Djokovic/Tsonga had to potentailly play 4 days in a row(which is fine, everyone here is biased one war or the other).



USO has never really been fair even at those times the event at was "dry" and rain didn't wreck the schedule simply because of Super(Stupid) Saturday which favours the player who played the 1st SF . Furthemore what is even more stupid about is that a high profile match usually plays out second. Be honest, were you outraged last year that Nadal played Youzhny first(a complete mismatch at that point of time) while Fed and Novak were scheduled second and battled it out in a five setter all the while knowing they have to face fresh Nadal tomorrow? Now Novak got lucky it rained after and he recovered completely for the match, otherwise if they played on Sunday he would have probably goten bageled or something.



Yes JCF did look drained in that final but while I like the guy's game he's no Nadal, neither when it comes to stamina nor mental toughness. Nadal played almost every day in 2007 Wimbledon and still played like a beast in the final which could have easily gone his way, he also recovered after that thriller with Nando to beat Fed in 2009 AO final(although he did have a day of rest, his SF was still brutal).

So writing Nadal off because of the schedule is premature, especially given that if Fed gets past Tsonga Nadal will in all likelyhood play a 1st SF which could somewhat balance the fact that he had less days off.
Click to expand...

I don't want him to be put in this situation. If he has to play 4 best of five matches in 4 days I'd rather see him losing to Muller and go home.
I don't care how many times this has happened in the past or if he's capable of winning like this or not. Precisely because it happened so many times he needs to stand up and say something about this. If he could moan about the slippery courts yesterday then surely he can say something about the stupid scheduling.
 
cc0509 said:
What are you talking about? Nadal and Federer play mostly the same tournaments except Nadal plays more clay events and Federer will play in Switzerland or whatever. I disagree with you in that Nadal never defending a title off clay AND the fact that he has won over 70% of his overall titles on clay show he has not dominated the way a former number one in the world should have. You can spin it any way you like but never defending off clay in his entire career is a weakness in his overall resume.
Click to expand...

Actually the conclusion is the same for both you and me(Rafa is not terrific of clay as far as winning titles goes) but WINNING just 11 titles off clay in what, 7 years, is far more important for our conclusion than their actual defense.
The guy wins 1-2 per year(if that) and you are expecting him to come back next year and win EXACTLY THOSE TOURNEYS. I don't see how that's relevant.

Look at this scenario:

1st year:win dubai/IW/Miami in 1st year.
2nd year:fail to do so in 2nd year but win AO and Shanghai instead.
3rd year:can't defend AO or Shanghai, but win Canada and USO.
4th year:fail at those but win Cincy and Paris.

You would be with some major titles in your belt yet not a single defense up your sleeve.

Djoko and Murray, with more HC titles than Rafa and better HC ability, only defended 3, respectively 2 times, and both came in smaller tournies(dubai,san jose) + 1 MS(Beijing,Canada).
 
namelessone said:
Ok, so injuries are irrelevant to those figures. Good to know.

It would be interesting to see how you would defend a title without being in the draw because of physical issues.
Click to expand...

honestly, you are either fit to play or you are not.

fitness is part of the game too, is it not?
 
zagor said:
So writing Nadal off because of the schedule is premature, especially given that if Fed gets past Tsonga Nadal will in all likelyhood play a 1st SF which could somewhat balance the fact that he had less days off.
Click to expand...

I agree. Nadal has shown over and over that he is just fine the next day or two even after a long match--see the AO 2009. People were moaning forever about Nadal being too tired to defeat Federer in the final because of his marathon match with Verdasco and we know how that turned out. These people are professional athletes. If they can't play a tennis match two days in a row something is wrong with that picture. It may not be ideal during a slam, but, so what. The best player during this tournament will win the USO this year, regardless of any extraneous circumstances.

I can just hear the possible excuses from the Nadal fans now if Nadal does not win this title. :rolleyes: All of these unfortunate incidents such as rain delays, not as much time in between matches and injuries or whatever are part of tennis, and at the end of the day, it does not matter. When the players step on the court to play the match it is game on and the better player that day will win. The reasons don't really matter, only the win does and that goes for all players IMO not just Nadal. Simple really.
 
SLD76 said:
Consistency doesn't have anything to do with DEFENDING titles


Umm....doesnt it though?

I mean isnt part of Rafa's greatness the fact that he is nigh unbeatable at the French Open?

Inst the reason we call him the Clay Goat because year in year out he wins every clay tournament( 2011 aside)???

Ummm, defending titles sorta is the highest benchmark of consistency.
Click to expand...

Guga won 3 titles in RG, yet only 2 consecutive. He is considered by many as the second best claycourter after Rafa in the last 20 years(due to his RG titles) yet he has, on all surfaces, ONE, just ONE title defense, RG 2000-2001.

Guga couldn't defend a title on his fav surface except RG yet he is considered one of the greats.
 
namelessone said:
Actually the conclusion is the same for both you and me(Rafa is not terrific of clay as far as winning titles goes) but WINNING just 11 titles off clay in what, 7 years, is far more important for our conclusion than their actual defense.The guy wins 1-2 per year(if that) and you are expecting him to come back next year and win EXACTLY THOSE TOURNEYS. I don't see how that's relevant.

Look at this scenario:

1st year:win dubai/IW/Miami in 1st year.
2nd year:fail to do so in 2nd year but win AO and Shanghai instead.
3rd year:can't defend AO or Shanghai, but win Canada and USO.
4th year:fail at those but win Cincy and Paris.

You would be with some major titles in your belt yet not a single defense up your sleeve.

Djoko and Murray, with more HC titles than Rafa and better HC ability, only defended 3, respectively 2 times, and both came in smaller tournies(dubai,san jose) + 1 MS(Beijing,Canada).
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand your point and I do agree that in the end winning titles over time is more important than defending a title necessarily. I just find it odd that Nadal has never defended one title off clay and to me that is a weakness.

You are correct though, our conclusion is the same in the end--i.e. Nadal is clearly the best by far on clay.
 
cc0509 said:
I agree. Nadal has shown over and over that he is just fine the next day or two even after a long match--see the AO 2009. People were moaning forever about Nadal being too tired to defeat Federer in the final because of his marathon match with Verdasco and we know how that turned out. These people are professional athletes. If they can't play a tennis match two days in a row something is wrong with that picture. It may not be ideal during a slam, but, so what. The best player during this tournament will win the USO this year, regardless of any extraneous circumstances.

I can just hear the possible excuses from the Nadal fans now if Nadal does not win this title. :rolleyes: All of these unfortunate incidents such as rain delays, not as much time in between matches and injuries or whatever are part of tennis, and at the end of the day, it does not matter. When the players step on the court to play the match it is game on and the better player that day will win. The reasons don't really matter, only the win does and that goes for all players IMO not just Nadal. Simple really.
Click to expand...

Tell that to David Nalbandian.

Seriously, this isnt a tour title where you never know if a guy is giving his best or just tweaking his game. Presumably in a slam players are going all out and the intensity of the matches is cranked up. So, again, its not the same as a master series event.

Second, I dont want to see two guys who can barely move slugging it out, I want top quality tennis. I dont wanna some guy on the court dead tired take a pounding. Yes fitness is a part of tennis but again, this is a slam where every match is life and death, not the same intensity as a regular tour event.

That said, we may as well hand the title to Djokovic. I dont even think Nadal, at this stage in his career could recover so well.
 
namelessone said:
Consistency doesn't have anything to do with DEFENDING titles, but winning as much as possible on said surface, or even reaching latter stages.

In six years at the top, Rafa had only SEVEN opportunities(6 HC, 1 grass) to actually come and defend his non-clay titles. That says a lot...(and there are MANY guys better than Rafa on HC) or GS(WB 2011 failed defense).
Click to expand...

You bet that says a lot! You're actually making a very good case for Ralph being not only inconsistent outside of clay, but also not that great.
Defending titles has everything to do with being consistently at the top of the pack. Making it deep into a tournament but not going all the way won't help you stand out.
 
cc0509 said:
Yes, I understand your point and I do agree that in the end winning titles over time is more important than defending a title necessarily. I just find it odd that Nadal has never defended one title off clay and to me that is a weakness.

You are correct though, our conclusion is the same in the end--i.e. Nadal is clearly the best by far on clay.
Click to expand...

The actual weakness would be winning so few of them in 7 years, not failing to defending them.

The likelyhood is far smaller than you think. If you win 1-2 titles PER YEAR(if that), what are the odds that you will defend EXACTLY those 1-2 next year?

Now if Rafa has something close to 20-25 titles off clay and never defended a single one, that would be freaking weird.
 
Last edited:
namelessone said:
The actual weakness would be winning so few of them in 7 years, not failing to defending them.

The likelyhood is far smaller than you think. If you win 1-2 titles PER YEAR(if that), what are the odds that you will defend EXACTLY those 1-2 next year?
Click to expand...

Come on guy, nobody is saying RAfa sucks off clay, but statistically speaking, Rafa by now should have lucked up and defended one title outside of clay.

I will give him a half credit for Wimbledon because of 09, but it is curious tha he has never defended a non clay title. For a guy of his calibur.
 
namelessone said:
In order to do their job they need a (mostly) dry court to play on. The USTA didn't provide that for them and yet they expected them to go out and play, risking injury in the process, not to mention that the tennis would have been of low quality.

Nadal,Roddick,Murray,Ferrer(all the major players still in 4th round) said that the courts were wet(danger of slipping) and Murray even said that the balls had soaked up water.

Read up on the situation. Everybody is siding with the players on this one and blaming the USTA for its incompetence in organizing this slam.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on this issue. It was totally stupid to send Murray, Roddick and Nadal out in those conditions just to play for 15 minutes. Very poor management of the tourney just so they would not have to potentially offer refunds to the spectators. I mean I totally understand their point of view as tennis is big business but I would be annoyed as well if I were a player who was sent out in those conditions only to have to come back 15 minutes later.
They knew the forecast and their story about the misty conditions not showing on the weather radar is pure BS. Do they have eyes in their heads, as that is all they would need to see the back of the courts were wet (according to Murray and Roddick.)
 
namelessone said:
The actual weakness would be winning so few of them in 7 years, not failing to defending them.

The likelyhood is far smaller than you think. If you win 1-2 titles PER YEAR(if that), what are the odds that you will defend EXACTLY those 1-2 next year?
Click to expand...

Yea to be honest this defending stuff only comes into picture since Federer stats are pretty much over 9000 everywhere. It would be interesting to see how much Sampras or Borg or Laver defended their titles on all 3 surfaces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
I've never met ONE person who likes Andy Murray - and I'm from Britain!!
2 3 4
Replies
168
Views
43K
Grafil Injection
Grafil Injection
big ted
why is djokovic playing alcapulco
2
Replies
93
Views
8K
joe sch
joe sch
T
Defamation suits against TTW members?
2
Replies
86
Views
9K
AngieB
AngieB
C
Pacific Life Open
Replies
0
Views
711
chrisab508
C
G
Nadal the best on the ATP??
Replies
24
Views
2K
Aykhan Mammadov
Aykhan Mammadov
Back
Top