US Open 2010: Why Murray is a bad match-up for Nadal

[abmk]

All of Murray's victories over Nadal (except maybe the USO one) were when Nadal was playing s.hit and was getting dominated by inferior players.

Now that nobody deny that , I can say without doubt that my point has been proved.

When Nadal is at his best he wins, when Nadal plays badly and struggle against top 50's , he loses against Murray.

umm, you are one clueless fella >> nadal played much better in the AO 2010 match than in the USO 2008 one

and yes, you proved your point >> that you are highly delusional

 

[Murrayfan31]

All of Murray's victories over Nadal (except maybe the USO one) were when Nadal was playing s.hit and was getting dominated by inferior players.

Now that nobody deny that , I can say without doubt that my point has been proved.

When Nadal is at his best he wins, when Nadal plays badly and struggle against top 50's , he loses against Murray.

Nadal played pretty well against Murray in Toronto this year. It's just that Murray was at another level. Same with Federer in Toronto. Murray is the superior hardcourt player.

 

[abmk]

and no, murray is not a nightmare or a very bad matchup for nadal on HC... he poses a set of difficulties for nadal on HC, no doubt, but not so much that nadal can't overcome those if he's playing well ..

 

[Heracles]

Nadal played pretty well against Murray in Toronto this year. It's just that Murray was at another level. Same with Federer in Toronto. Murray is the superior hardcourt player.

Nadal was awful during Toronto and Cincinnati, almost losing to the likes of Benneteau or Kolshchreiber and losing to Baghdatis. That's some of the worst tennis he played in years.

I have never seen Murray beating a in form Nadal (best he has done was in USO).

 

[Heracles]

umm, you are one clueless fella >> nadal played much better in the AO 2010 match than in the USO 2008 one

and yes, you proved your point >> that you are highly delusional

You are really a joke.

Nadal did not play a top level match during after Roma 2009 and until MC 2010. You really know nothing.

You theory is that Nadal was getting clowned by everybody worthy and suddenly, out of nowhere, played his best tennis against Murray at OA and then was s.hit again right after.

Delusional should be you first name.

 

[batz]

I watched those match and I say again what I say, and more time than 1.

Nadal was horrible against Kohlshreiber for the most part and was bad against Karlovic and Murray. If you disagree you can as well go away. I feel I am perfectly right and what happened before and after that match shows me that I was right.

So Murray beat Nadal at Rotterdam, when Nadal was almost losing to the likes of Bolleli and Dimitrov, at AO, during Nadal slump and in Toronto, when Nadal almost lost to Kohlschreiber and in the following tourney almost lost to Benneteau and lost to Bagdhatis.

I am perfectly right.

When Murray beat Nadal, it's when Nadal is struggling against everybody eslse. As simple as that. Facts are facts and you can't deny them.

Each time Murray has beaten Nadal, Nadal was playing poor and losing/almost losing to inferiors players.

You are delusional.

Murray beat Nadal in straight sets a couple of weeks ago. At the time, Nadal was thousands of points clear as world number 1 and had won the previous 5 straight masters series and grand slam events.

Tell me - how does a player get thousands of points in front as world number 1, win 5 straight MS and slam events, whilst quote 'playing poor and losing/almost losing to inferiors players' unquote?

 

[Heracles]

You are delusional.

Murray beat Nadal in straight sets a couple of weeks ago. At the time, Nadal was thousands of points clear as world number 1 and had won the previous 5 straight masters series and grand slam events.

Tell me - how does a player get thousands of points in front as world number 1, win 5 straight MS and slam events, whilst quote 'playing poor and losing/almost losing to inferiors players' unquote?

Murray beat Nadal when Nadal almost lost to Kohlschreiber and Benneteau and when he lost against Baghdatis.

If Nadal struggling against Kolhschreiber, saving a match point against Benneteau and losing to Baghdatis is a top Nadal for you, then you are truely a joke.

 

[Xenakis]

It's possible that Rafa's biggest disappointment thus far in his career has been his fans.

Some, perhaps most are fine but there exists a moronic fringe who won't listen to anything Rafa actually says or even believe their own eyes when they see him play, instead they persist in propagating fantastical nonsense about his game because their own self-esteem is at stake.

Sad, really sad.

 

[batz]

Murray beat Nadal when Nadal almost lost to Kohlschreiber and Benneteau and when he lost against Baghdatis.

If Nadal struggling against Kolhschreiber, saving a match point against Benneteau and losing to Baghdatis is a top Nadal for you, then you are truely a joke.

Nadal struggled several times at Wimbledon and still won. He got pushed all the way by the slam giant that is Verdsasco before beating Roger in the final of AO 2009.

Your theory has more holes in it than a seive. Rafa loses. Sometimes he loses because the other guy played better that day. If you need to tell yourself that the only reason Rafa lost is because of him not being 'in form' or some other lame excuse, then fair enough. But don't blame people for pointing and laughing when you state such absurdities on a public messageboard.

 

[Heracles]

Nadal struggled several times at Wimbledon and still won. He got pushed all the way by the slam giant that is Verdsasco before beating Roger in the final of AO 2009.

Your theory has more holes in it than a seive. Rafa loses. Sometimes he loses because the other guy played better that day. If you need to tell yourself that the only reason Rafa lost is because of him not being 'in form' or some other lame excuse, then fair enough. But don't blame people for pointing and laughing when you state such absurdities on a public messageboard.

Sorry but the facts show that I am right and you are butt hurt because I broke your claim of Murray being a bad match up for Nadal.


Next time that Nadal will look impressive , you will pick Murray, and you will be wrong and you will be unable to figure why Nadal won since Murray is a "bad match up". Classic.

 

[inthemisosoup]

i love the nadal-murray match up and i am not a very big fan of either of the players (though both have grown considerably on me). it's almost always a tense, exciting, high level of tennis. tennis and fans (not ****s) win whenever they play each other. if it weren't for nalbandian in rafa's quarter, i'd be rooting for this semi. it would make for a great final, too, pity that's not possible this year.

enjoyed the article a lot, thanks OP

 

[batz]

Sorry but the facts show that I am right and you are butt hurt because I broke your claim of Murray being a bad match up for Nadal.


Next time that Nadal will look impressive , you will pick Murray, and you will be wrong and you will be unable to figure why Nadal won since Murray is a "bad match up". Classic.

1. I've made no such claim

2. It wouldn't surprise me if Nadal beat Murray in their next match

3. Your delusions are only being confirmed by your continued insistence that the facts back up your position. As others have said. It's really quite sad that you seek to rationalise Rafa's losses in the way you do.

 

[illkhiboy]

i love the nadal-murray match up and i am not a very big fan of either of the players (though both have grown considerably on me). it's almost always a tense, exciting, high level of tennis. tennis and fans (not ****s) win whenever they play each other. if it weren't for nalbandian in rafa's quarter, i'd be rooting for this semi. it would make for a great final, too, pity that's not possible this year.

enjoyed the article a lot, thanks OP

Thank you! Not many have commented on the article itself, and I wonder if it's too detailed.

I too am rooting for Nalbandian to go deep at the Open. If you think about it, he can certainly beat all the players in his section of the draw. Problem is, he can also beat himself pretty easily

Batz, don't feed the troll!

 

[SiriusTennis]

Don't be so insensitive.
That was when Rafa heard that Donald Trump got a divorce from Ivana and was really upset.

Also, the water level in Australian lakes had dropped 1 centimeter in the past six months...that had a really adverse effect on his match plan...Murray was very lucky...

LOL .

 

[abmk]

You are really a joke.

Nadal did not play a top level match during after Roma 2009 and until MC 2010. You really know nothing.

You theory is that Nadal was getting clowned by everybody worthy and suddenly, out of nowhere, played his best tennis against Murray at OA and then was s.hit again right after.

Delusional should be you first name.

you are absolutely clueless about tennis ... nadal played very well in the AO QF 2010 ... he also played well in some of the matches in the period that you mention - vs djokovic @ madrid 2010 ,vs hewitt @ RG 2009, vs tsonga in one of the masters events, vs davydenko in doha 2010, vs murray in AO 2010 etc etc ...

my theory is not that he suddenly played his best tennis vs murray, he improved after the match vs kohlschreiber ....

you are one ignoramus/clown ! you are an disgrace to tennis warehouse !!!!!

 

[abmk]

Yes, do tell Heracles.

So far in the 'Rafa only lost because' series, you've given us 'he wasn't in form' - but there must be more, no?

Please share. Health? Knees? Altitude?

the sun was in his eyes

stomach ache

tooth ache

he missed his momma

he missed playing with his toys

etc etc

 

[NLBwell]

If I take account your logic, then Murray is a bad match up for Nadal and Nadal is a bad match up for Murray.

Yeah, so what's your point? I'd agree with this statement. Although since Murray is the lower-ranked player, I'd lean more to the Murray is a bad matchup for Nadal.

 

[illkhiboy]

Yeah, so what's your point? I'd agree with this statement. Although since Murray is the lower-ranked player, I'd lean more to the Murray is a bad matchup for Nadal.

That's a good point, but I think the way the points play out Nadal clearly feels very uncomfortable despite the fact that he gets his share of chances to go ahead. Apart from Nalbandian, no one on the tour makes Nadal feel that way. On the other hand, Murray has his problems with many players on tour - Fish comes to mind. Against Nadal, he seems to be in his comfort zone.

 

[Peters]

It's possible that Rafa's biggest disappointment thus far in his career has been his fans.

Some, perhaps most are fine but there exists a moronic fringe who won't listen to anything Rafa actually says or even believe their own eyes when they see him play, instead they persist in propagating fantastical nonsense about his game because their own self-esteem is at stake.

Sad, really sad.

The most spot-on post in this thread so far.

 

[CMM]

Yes, do tell Heracles.

So far in the 'Rafa only lost because' series, you've given us 'he wasn't in form' - but there must be more, no?

Please share. Health? Knees? Altitude?

We just found out that Rafa's watch was stolen in Toronto. He was obviously worried and he couldn't focus on the match, so this allowed Murray to win.