Talking about matches involving Nadal in 2004 as relevant, ROTFL!!! You really are beyond desperate. Hewitt and Roddick would not stop Nadal from winning any slam, if Nadal is in slam winning form he always will beat such players, and if he were in the form to lose to either they arent events he was in the form to win anyway.
Nadal has reached the finals of 5 of the last 6 Wimbledons he played but won it twice by fluke, whatever. He is if anything unlucky to not have 3 or 4 Wimbledons, probably would have won in 2009 had he been able to play, and was a bit unlucky to lose that 2007 final. If anyone has been lucky at Wimbledon, make that super lucky, it is Federer with the rain delay in 2004 quite possibly being what saved his ass vs Roddick, Nadal blowing so many chances in that 2007 match and somehow scraping through despite losing about 80% of the baseline rallies, Nadal not playing in 2009 and that final which Roddick should have won. The last thing a **** should be speaking of is other players being lucky at Wimbledon.
On another note you should also be reminded that a Hewitt fanboy is also the last one who should talk about anyone else being lucky. The same player who had he peaked in anything than the transition era before Federer entered his prime and after the whole Sampras generation had hit the rocks (other than an already 32 year old Agassi) would today likely have 0 slams, 0 weeks at #1, 0 WTF, zero anything that makes him anymore relevant than say Tommy Haas.
Lastly who was going to beat Nadal in the 2010 Wimbledon final, Federer who nearly went out to Falla and got powered off court by Berdych, Djokovic, go ahead and give an answer, whoever it is will be a funny one. Nadal played the 2nd best player of that Wimbledon which was Murray in the semis and won in straight sets, and the 3rd (or 2nd) best player of that Wimbledon which was Berdych in the final and again won in straight sets. I am sure he would have loved to feed Federer or Djokovic both in mediocre form (and Djokovic in anything other than his 2011 form mediocre on grass to begin with) some bakery products rather than facing the more in form opponents like Murray and Berdych, but that is how it went, but hey he dealt with the tougher opponents easily anyway. By your logic we could say Federer winning Wimbledon this year was a fluke and it would be even more true, the guy hadnt been to a Wimbledon semi in 3 years, and faced Murray who was 0-9 in sets in slam finals, but I wouldnt do that since even that would sound stupid, but it is what one would say by your ridiculous logic.
Thanks for the great laughs your posts in this thread gave me though. Great comedy.
