What is the criteria for a "cakewalk" draw?

[mandy01]

First of all YEC doesn't count - only BO3 there buddy.

Yeah of course.Any tournament that Nadal dosen't win,dosen't count for Rafatardfanboys.
Fact though,its that BO3 or BO5 ,YEC showcases only the best players and has a pretty good history behind it.So it definitely counts atleast as the most important event after slams.
The funny part is that if it were Nadal who'd won this thing 5 times and not Roger,we'd have never heard the end of it from *******s :lol::mrgreen:

 

[abmk]

Or Rafa played better in USO 2010 final than Fed did in AO06 quarters. Djoko is way tougher than Davy on a GS stage. If Fed's form was like Rafa's at 2010USO then he would've won more comfortably.

umm, no, davy's form per se was better than djoker's in USO 2010 final ... just because verdasco is much worse than djoker on GS stage, I'm not going to say nadal had it easier vs him in AO 2009 than he did vs djoker in USO 2010

Murray has a far better record against Fed than Roddick. He's been in the top 4 for the last few years because he has a more complete game than Roddick. Plus he played pretty well in the 2010 semi, He almost won the second set and was up a break for the majority of the third so he is a fine grass player and he would have every chance to beat Rog at Wimby; especially since Rafa beat Fed, he has been more vulnerable at Wimby because he lost that feeling of invincibility over there.

still doesn't explain why he got belted at the AO, on HC, where he is better than on grass ... also fed is better on grass than on slow HC ...

Where did I say Fed wasn't challenged at all? He was challenged because he wasn't in good form in those matches, if he was most of them would've been over in straights. Fed's poor form doesn't make the draw tough.

I believe that was about the 23 GS SFs and how significant an achievement that is ... someone that over-confident as you make him out to be could never have achieved that

Yeah because you'll whinge about the great and good players I choose. We clearly have different opinions on who they are. Roddick has had ONE great match against Fed in 22 attempts, JMDP has already had 2 with a fewer amount of encounters. BTW Delpo is a good player, he doesn't qualify for great just yet.

if USO 2009 F qualifies as great, then so does wim 2004 ... wim 2004 was better in quality even if it didn't go to 5 ...

What about unreturnables? Could you please provide a link with this information? I'd be interested to see it.

nah, that info isn't there

Yes and when Rafa wasn't playing well, the scoreline was close. When he found his range Verdasco got thumped. This has been my point all along, Fed wasn't sharp against Davy or Haas (FO 09) especially and that's why the score was close, had he played in sharp form like Rafa did for most of the 2010 USO those matches would've been over in straights. So again, Fed's poor form against players ranked outside top 5 doesn't make the draw tough.

rafa didn't find his range in AO 2009, that's why it went to 5 right ? :roll:

obviously not expecting verdy to repeat that level, but face it , verdy played cr*p after half a set

Yes because little did he realise that Rafa was a completely different opponent than the one he beat at USO06 quarters.

yes, he's that dumb :roll:

Could you please provide a link to showcase Fed's success against both Murray and Djoko on grass? You might have trouble finding it because they have NEVER played there. They both have a far greater record against Fed than Roddick and they have both been consistently in the top 4 over the past few years. So specifically about GRASS, yes both Murray and Djoko have a better chance against Fed than anyone bar Nadal. In fact both Murray and Djoko individually have had greater success against Fed than Roddick ever has.



We don't, but at least wait until they have played roughly an equal amount of times before commenting. Both of Fed's wins came against a Nadal that was not the same player we see today. BTW why did you dodge my question? Are you too embarrassed to say that Fed hasn't beaten Rafa at a GS since 2007 Wim which was almost 3.5 years ago?

You seem to conveniently forget that those 7 wins were on HC, meaning he beat him comfortably on that surface. Djokovic had a 6-3 outdoor HC h2h lead against Rafa prior to their final compared to Fed who has/had a 1-3 losing outdoor HC h2h against Rafa. So Djoko was clearly more dangerous.

I believe you already know the answer, so why the need to even ask that ? :lol:


If djoker had shown semblance of beating rafa any time it mattered, we could've talked ... fed > djoker as an opponent to rafa in ANY big match .

5 GS matches+1 Olympics+twice in YEC+once in hamburg with #2 ranking on the line ... enough sample to say djoker can't get it done vs rafa when it really matters

let's also look a bit more closely at their hard court H2H, shall we ?

djoker took 3 matches on HC in the period from after wimby 2009 to YEC 2009, when rafa was losing almost every match to top 10 players ... fed didn't even get to meet him once in that period ... Doesn't that skew the comparision in the HC H2H stats ?

No, I'm not the only one who believes that Fed gets over-confident before matches that he's the clear favorite to win.

so he's over-confident for the majority of his matches ...... LMAO !!!!!!!

I live in Aus and i watched that match live on channel 7 and it was 4 years ago. I don't like to open up a tab with wikipedia just to check the scores of what you and I both know was an average match. My point was that after the first set Gonzo was history and therefore you cannot consider him a tough opponent for Fed. And yes Fed's game does prevent Gonzo from setting up, but he was missing sitters that he wasn't in the previous two matches.

doesn't look like you watched it ... I did say gonzo wasn't playing as well as he did in the previous 2 matches, but he still played fairly well ...

Fair enough, but it doesn't help your initial argument that scud was a good opponent. He was unseeded in 2003 and played well to beat an Agassi that wasn't the same guy Rafter faced in '00 and '01. After that match he struggled apart from Grosjean who is hardly an accomplished grass/GS player.

I've already elaborated on this ... he was a decent/good opponent, not a tough one . EOS !

So, Roddick went from good in 2003, to tough in 2004, to average in 2005, to shi.t in 2006,2007 and 2008, to tough in 2009 then back to average in 2010 (he had mono)? I thought he was a great grass court player that poses more trouble than anyone other than Rafa. Hardly the case.

LOL !

So then why argue about the opponents Fed faced in that tourny if you thought it was easier?

I was just elaborating on what I thought about the opponents in those draw. But as it has become very clear, you can't read properly !

That's obviously a typo those greater than - less than signs are right next to each other. You lied because you did not imply that Djoko was a worthy opponent by calling him slightly greater than Safin, he was MUCH tougher than Safin in 04. That 2010 USO semi was not a hard fought 5 setter with 2 very quick sets, plus the final was delayed an extra day and even when it was on there were rain delays during the match so there was no way Djoko was even slightly tired.

LOL, how much of a clown are you ?

1. you don't watch matches
2. you can't read
3. you can't bother checking the actual scores before spewing your BS !

yes, safin wasn't at its fittest after those matches, which is why I put him as < djoker

Hey I'm posting in this thread, regarding posters in this thread. I'm not one of those guys.

well, if you are not even aware of what goes on here then you shouldn't go on whining about people talking about rafa's USO draw !

P.S. regarding those incomplete statements, those were because I posted in a hurry ..

 

[abmk]

Yeah of course.Any tournament that Nadal dosen't win,dosen't count for Rafatardfanboys.
Fact though,its that BO3 or BO5 ,YEC showcases only the best players and has a pretty good history behind it.So it definitely counts atleast as the most important event after slams.
The funny part is that if it were Nadal who'd won this thing 5 times and not Roger,we'd have never heard the end of it from *******s :lol::mrgreen:

as one of them put it, the YEC is just a glorified exhibition :lol:

 

[Sentinel]

as one of them put it, the YEC is just a glorified exhibition :lol:

you forgot to say "cheesy" (courtesy cesc, i think).

 

[abmk]

you forgot to say "cheesy" (courtesy cesc, i think).

glorified exhibition was from T&M I believe ....don't recall the cheesy word being used by anyone though !

 

[Sharpshooter]

umm, no, davy's form per se was better than djoker's in USO 2010 final ... just because verdasco is much worse than djoker on GS stage, I'm not going to say nadal had it easier vs him in AO 2009 than he did vs djoker in USO 2010

No it wasn't. It was a combination of both Davy playing at his best and Fed a little off and Nadal playing very well and Djoko playing well. Because Rafa's form was very good, he made it seem like Djoko was an easier opponent and because Davy played well and Fed was a little off Davy seemed like the tougher opponent. As for Verdasco, yes obviously AO09 semi was tougher for Nadal than 2010 USO final, but if I could pick and choose I would rather have Nadal face Verdasco than Djokovic in a GS final anyday. Davy didn't have the nerve to beat Fed when he had the chance, Verdasco held his nerve till the last point. But Djoko has proved that he HAS the nerve to beat the best in GS competition and that's what makes him a tougher opponent. Also you cannot compare Davy's performance with Verdasco's, he didn't win 2 sets and take it to Fed in the fifth, he lost in 4.

still doesn't explain why he got belted at the AO, on HC, where he is better than on grass ... also fed is better on grass than on HC ...

Doesn't need to, they are 2 different tournaments on 2 different surfaces and therefore you cannot say that Murray would've lost to Fed JUST because he lost to him at the Aus Open. Fed had played some of the best tennis of his life at the Aus open in 2010 but that wasn't the case at Wim 09.

I believe that was about the 23 GS SFs and how significant an achievement that is ... someone that over-confident as you make him out to be could never have achieved that

Yes it is a very significant achievement and probably will never be repeated, but again you misinterpret me. Fed gets over-confident when he feels no threat whatsoever from his opponent and that happens sometimes, not every single time. The 15 on the jacket is the prime example.

if USO 2009 F qualifies as great, then so does wim 2004 ... wim 2004 was better in quality even if it didn't go to 5 ...

Nonsense, how can it be a GREAT when one guy only won one set? It was very good, but not one of the greats and IMO the 09 USO final was better than the 04 Wimb final you give that match too much credit. Again if it wasn't for the bias in these forums I'd create a poll to see which match was better and the 09USO would win hands down if everyone was objective.

nah, that info isn't there

I meant the info for aces and service holds.

rafa didn't find his range in AO 2009, that's why it went to 5 right ? :roll

obviously not expecting verdy to repeat that level, but face it , verdy played cr*p after half a set :

If you watched the USO match it was obvious that Rafa was missing a few shots that he normally wouldn't and once he rectified that he took the match in a breeze. Plus Verdasco was not playing at the level he played in 09 AO he played as his normal self. That performance at the AO was one of a kind just like Roddick at 09 Wimby and will most likely never be repeated again. It was also better than Davy's performance at 06AO where Fed clearly wasn't sharp. But don't get me wrong, Davy did play very well, but Davy's nerves cost him sets and ultimately the match whereas Verdasco held his nerve for most of the Nadal match apart from the final point.

yes, he's that dumb :roll:

C'mon we are talking about a guy who split his own head open with his racquet. Yes he is that dumb.

I believe you already know the answer, so why the need to even ask that ? :lol:

Just to reiterate that Fed didn't really have that much of a chance either in that form especially.

If djoker had shown semblance of beating rafa any time it mattered, we could've talked ... fed > djoker as an opponent to rafa in ANY big match .

5 GS matches+1 Olympics+twice in YEC+once in hamburg with #2 ranking on the line ... enough sample to say djoker can't get it done vs rafa when it really matters

Hamburg was on clay of course he wasn't going to win that. It was 1 all in the YEC at the time, 4 GS matches and the Olympics. 3 of those GS matches were at the FO 06 07 and 08 I believe and the other at Wimbledon. C'mon it's not like he was ever going to win those and the Wimby match he was injured and had to retire. They were not HC encounters, the Olympics was the only HC match that mattered and that went the distance.

So based on all those FO GS losses + the Wimbledon one you've come to the conclusion that Djoko could not possibly beat Rafa yet Fed could when he has a worse record including on HC? WOW. Just wow.

let's also look a bit more closely at their hard court H2H, shall we ?


djoker took 3 matches on HC in the period from after wimby 2009 to YEC 2009, when rafa was losing almost every match to top 10 players ... fed didn't even get to meet him once in that period ... Doesn't that skew the comparision in the HC H2H stats ?

He had a 6-3 outdoor record, so let's take off 2 wins. Hmmm still 4-3 in outdoor HC and still >>> than 1-3 so what's your point?

You should've inspected the 'important losses' more than this.

so he's over-confident for the majority of his matches ...... LMAO !!!!!!!

Well I doubt he wouldn't feel that way in his first 4 rounds. Once he gets to the finals it depends on who he plays.

doesn't look like you watched it ... I did say gonzo wasn't playing as well as he did in the previous 2 matches, but he still played fairly well ...

No he didn't play fairly well at all after that first set he had treatment on his shoulder and lost a lot of flare on his serve and groundstrokes. Even that first set he was kept in it by a series of Fed errors.

But hey don't take my word for it...

http://www.lattimore.id.au/2007/01/29/australian-open-winner-2007-roger-federer/

I've already elaborated on this ... he was a decent/good opponent, not a tough one . EOS !

LOL calm down.

I was just elaborating on what I thought about the opponents in those draw. But as it has become very clear, you can't read properly !

Yeah then you went on about all of Poo's pre-injury achievements to try and pump up his tyres.

LOL, how much of a clown are you ?

1. you don't watch matches
2. you can't read
3. you can't bother checking the actual scores before spewing your BS !

yes, safin wasn't at its fittest after those matches, which is why I put him as < djoker

You obviously just looked up the AO 07 final score and based your match analysis on that alone. Read the damn article I posted with egg on your face pal. It's obviously you who doesn't watch the matches.

Every opponent in comparison to Rafa is >>> but Safin just the one < yeah? What a load of shi.t! If you did consider the circumstances and realised that Safin went through the entire draw in either 4 or 5 sets (the majority 5) then you would put a fresh Djoko >>>>> a VERY buggered Safin. He put up no resistance in that final yet he's only slightly easier than Djoko.

I obviously watch more matches than you, who just goes to wikipedia and says "OOH look! That match had a tiebreak and two 6-4 sets so it must've been tough!". Gimme a break.

well, if you are not even aware of what goes on here then you shouldn't go on whining about people talking about rafa's USO draw !

And you say I can't read? Where did I say I wasn't aware of those guys? I'm aware of them, but i'm not one of them, try and find one thread where at the start of the tourny I say Fed's got a cakewalk draw. If you don't approve of their posts go and bother them about it, I'm only commenting on what I read in this thread and responded accordingly.

P.S. regarding those incomplete statements, those were because I posted in a hurry ..

Take your time :wink:

 

[mandy01]

^^exactly how many times do you plan to lie about the '15' jacket? It's pretty obvious you don't watch tennis or only watch it your lover boy is on TV & love parroting fabricated facts.
This is hilarious.He lies,gets called out on it and STILL dosen't stop.

 

[Sharpshooter]

^^exactly how many times do you plan to lie about the '15' jacket? It's pretty obvious you don't watch tennis or only watch it your lover boy is on TV & love parroting fabricated facts.
This is hilarious.He lies,gets called out on it and STILL dosen't stop.

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. Now what lie am I telling? And the word is spelt doESn't ok? The E comes before the S you moron.

 

[cknobman]

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. Now what lie am I telling? And the word is spelt doESn't ok? The E comes before the S you moron.

Irony at its best!!!!!

 

[mandy01]

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. Now what lie am I telling? And the word is spelt doESn't ok? The E comes before the S you moron.

What a ******.He's completely ignorant of the fact/blatantly lies about it,he gets called out on it & then turns around and calls others morons.
Fed was given the jacket after the match was over.Now go and actually watch some tennis instead of parroting what fellow *******s probably told you.

 

[aphex]

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. Now what lie am I telling? And the word is spelt doESn't ok? The E comes before the S you moron.

He got handed the jacket after the match you useless muppet.

 

[15_ounce]

Cakewalk Draw = when you have walkovers in all of your matches before you get to the final, and you also have a walkover in the final :lol:

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Irony at its best!!!!!

spelt and spelled are both acceptable.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. Now what lie am I telling? And the word is spelt doESn't ok? The E comes before the S you moron.

That isnt correct, Sharpshooter.See for yourself by going to 1:36:13 mark in this video. Bizarre, but some old guy with a kilt handed it to Fed after the match.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSRNrdvrg-I&feature=related

 

[Rippy]

He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started. .

 

[Sharpshooter]

Irony at its best!!!!!

WTF are you talking about? Spelt and spelled are both acceptable in the English language you muppet. How embarrassing cknobhead

 

[Sharpshooter]

That isnt correct, Sharpshooter.See for yourself by going to 1:36:13 mark in this video. Bizarre, but some old guy with a kilt handed it to Fed after the match.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSRNrdvrg-I&feature=related

Yeah I know, I didn't mean he literally carried it onto court that was obvious that he didn't do that what I meant was he had the jacket out there and was ready to put it on. By saying he, I meant him and his entourage.

 

[Rippy]

Yeah I know, I didn't mean he literally carried it onto court that was obvious that he didn't do that what I meant was he had the jacket out there and was ready to put it on. By saying he, I meant him and his entourage.

"He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started." is what you said.

If you want us to read "his entourage" instead of "he" in your valiant attempts to backpedal, it is still completely wrong. They didn't carry it onto court before the match started.

 

[Sharpshooter]

He got handed the jacket after the match you useless muppet.

Yes but by saying he, I meant he had his entourage carry it to court, there's no way they could've got it to him that fast without it being there somewhere. It's like a CEO gets his assistant to fax something for him, you say he faxed the file even though he didn't literally do it. It makes perfect sense you dumb flog.

 

[Sharpshooter]

"He had a jacket with 15 on it which he carried onto court before the match started." is what you said.

If you want us to read "his entourage" instead of "he" in your valiant attempts to backpedal, it is still completely wrong. They didn't carry it onto court before the match started.

And how do you know they didn't carry onto court somewhere? Does it HAVE to be where the players sit for it to be considered on court? It got to him incredibly fast in fact about a minute after the match was over and about 20-30 secs after he sat down. Maybe superman ran into his room and got it for him.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

And how do you know they didn't carry onto court somewhere? Does it HAVE to be where the players sit for it to be considered on court? It got to him incredibly fast in fact about a minute after the match was over and about 20-30 secs after he sat down. Maybe superman ran into his room and got it for him.

like 20 minutes after winning the NBA finals.... :shock:.

Maybe the lakers were so arrogant that they told their "entourage" to make it for them before the game started

 

[luvly]

Yes but by saying he, I meant he had his entourage carry it to court, there's no way they could've got it to him that fast without it being there somewhere. It's like a CEO gets his assistant to fax something for him, you say he faxed the file even though he didn't literally do it. It makes perfect sense you dumb flog.

negative there buddy you were trying to paint him in a negative light because he "carried the jacket out with him", which if it were the case it would be pretty pretentious and arrogant, he didnt carry it out there it was handed to him. he has said he didnt know the 15 was on the back...

it was literally the same jacket he had wore out for the warm up with the only difference being the 15 on the back...if someone hands you a jacket that looks just like one you have worn before are you going to inspect it (giving the circumstance of just breaking a record) to see whats different about it or are you going to just put it on???

 

[Rippy]

And how do you know they didn't carry onto court somewhere? Does it HAVE to be where the players sit for it to be considered on court? It got to him incredibly fast in fact about a minute after the match was over and about 20-30 secs after he sat down. Maybe superman ran into his room and got it for him.

OK, yes, I assume the person (Nike representative?) was in the complex.

But your comment was clearly trying to insinuate Federer walked onto the tennis court with it IMO.

Saying "Federer walked onto court with it" is a bit different than "It was given to Federer after he won by a member of his entourage".

 

[luvly]

And how do you know they didn't carry onto court somewhere? Does it HAVE to be where the players sit for it to be considered on court? It got to him incredibly fast in fact about a minute after the match was over and about 20-30 secs after he sat down. Maybe superman ran into his room and got it for him.

so arrogant of netjets to make this commercial and have it air as the first break after the french open was over

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGC0DHVP3Ww

someone clearly doesnt understand how marketing works

 

[Sharpshooter]

negative there buddy you were trying to paint him in a negative light because he "carried the jacket out with him", which if it were the case it would be pretty pretentious and arrogant, he didnt carry it out there it was handed to him. he has said he didnt know the 15 was on the back...

it was literally the same jacket he had wore out for the warm up with the only difference being the 15 on the back...if someone hands you a jacket that looks just like one you have worn before are you going to inspect it (giving the circumstance of just breaking a record) to see whats different about it or are you going to just put it on???

They had the jacket out there pal it's as clear as daylight.

Read this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/giles_smith/article6652499.ece

It even says it was in his kitbag which is a very good possibility. The Wimbledon footage I've seen is inconclusive; that old man could've just taken it out of Fed's kitbag for him and handed it to him.

And to say he didn't know there was a 15 on it is absolutely rediculous.

 

[Sharpshooter]

so arrogant of netjets to make this commercial and have it air as the first break after the french open was over

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGC0DHVP3Ww

someone clearly doesnt understand how marketing works

Yeah so obviously that ad was made before the match, just like the jacket. Doesn't prove that the jacket wasn't on court somewhere.

 

[Sharpshooter]

OK, yes, I assume the person (Nike representative?) was in the complex.

But your comment was clearly trying to insinuate Federer walked onto the tennis court with it IMO.

Saying "Federer walked onto court with it" is a bit different than "It was given to Federer after he won by a member of his entourage".

Interpret it however you want, you cannot prove that the jacket wasn't in his kitbag in the first place and even if it wasn't it had to be on court somewhere. It was obviously made before the match with his knowledge and consent. A Roger Federer would have great pull on what he wears from Nike, they wouldn't want to upset him and lose him so they have to keep him happy. He knew that jacket was being made and he knew there was a 15 on it and he didn't oppose it at all.

 

[Rippy]

Interpret it however you want, you cannot prove that the jacket wasn't in his kitbag in the first place and even if it wasn't it had to be on court somewhere.

Well, if you watch the person handing the jacket to Roger, it's obvious it wasn't in his kitbag. Unless, of course, he had a second one in his kitbag, but if that were the case, then why on earth would the man come over and hand him one?

It was obviously made before the match with his knowledge and consent.

Any evidence?

He knew that jacket was being made and he knew there was a 15 on it and he didn't oppose it at all.

Any evidence?

In fact, I'm fairly certain Federer gave a radio interview after Wimbledon and said he was unaware of the "15 jacket".

 

[luvly]

Interpret it however you want, you cannot prove that the jacket wasn't in his kitbag in the first place and even if it wasn't it had to be on court somewhere. It was obviously made before the match with his knowledge and consent. A Roger Federer would have great pull on what he wears from Nike, they wouldn't want to upset him and lose him so they have to keep him happy. He knew that jacket was being made and he knew there was a 15 on it and he didn't oppose it at all.

thats what he gets paid for darling for nike to be associated with his greatness...so it doesnt matter if he carried it out there (which he didnt)

 

[Sharpshooter]

Well, if you watch the person handing the jacket to Roger, it's obvious it wasn't in his kitbag. Unless, of course, he had a second one in his kitbag, but if that were the case, then why on earth would the man come over and hand him one?

Rubbish, the footage I've seen is a far shot of the whole court, then it shows the players box, then it goes back to that far shot then it shows Sampras then it goes back to the far shot where the guy is walking towards Fed. So how can you possibly tell me from that, that the old man didn't take it out of his kitbag, walk back to talk to some official and then walk over and hand it to Roger? The footage is inconclusive.

Any evidence?

Yeah the evidence is Nike approaches the players about everything they have lined up for them to wear. According to you, they could make a T-Shirt that says "Fed is a *****" and he wouldn't know about it and he would go out and wear it. Ludicrous logic.

Any evidence?

In fact, I'm fairly certain Federer gave a radio interview after Wimbledon and said he was unaware of the "15 jacket".

Watch the trophy presentation, when the woman asks what he has on the back of the jacket he knew exactly where to look and he even pointed out the 15 with his hand. Funny how he didn't know, he's def lying about that one which isn't a first.

 

[Sharpshooter]

thats what he gets paid for darling for nike to be associated with his greatness...so it doesnt matter if he carried it out there (which he didnt)

Yeah well then don't tell me he didn't know about it then.

 

[luvly]

Yeah well then don't tell me he didn't know about it then.

he said he didnt know about it...nike can plan whatever they want he gets paid to wear it and that does not mean he gets to approve it

 

[Sharpshooter]

he said he didnt know about it...nike can plan whatever they want he gets paid to wear it and that does not mean he gets to approve it

So you're admitting that Fed lied about it then. OK.

As for Nike, they can't add any prints that the player doesn't feel comfortable with. How huge would it be if Nike made something that Fed didn't want to wear but forced him to wear it anyway? Rog would have no problem going over to Adidas. Why would Nike risk that happening especially considering how bad it would make them look? Face it you know nothing about the process. Nike show Fed everything they have and if he isn't comfortable with a design or print then they would have no choice but to remove it otherwise they could risk losing him to a rival company. He was well aware of the 15 and didn't oppose it at all.

 

[luvly]

So you're admitting that Fed lied about it then. OK.

As for Nike, they can't add any prints that the player doesn't feel comfortable with. How huge would it be if Nike made something that Fed didn't want to wear but forced him to wear it anyway? Rog would have no problem going over to Adidas. Why would Nike risk that happening especially considering how bad it would make them look? Face it you know nothing about the process. Nike show Fed everything they have and if he isn't comfortable with a design or print then they would have no choice but to remove it otherwise they could risk losing him to a rival company. He was well aware of the 15 and didn't oppose it at all.

whatever if you want to say he lied then whatever. he said that he did not know about it...roger has always said that he was very appreciative of his relationship with nike they sponsored him from the beginning and when he resigned his contracted in like 2006 or 2005 they game him one of the highest contracts ever for a tennis player because he only made like a million (might have been per year) when he first started to do really well in 2004...

 

[mandy01]

They had the jacket out there pal it's as clear as daylight.

Read this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/giles_smith/article6652499.ece

It even says it was in his kitbag which is a very good possibility. The Wimbledon footage I've seen is inconclusive; that old man could've just taken it out of Fed's kitbag for him and handed it to him.

And to say he didn't know there was a 15 on it is absolutely rediculous.

No,pal,what a random columnist says is pretty much irrelevant.Columnists can often not even get their basic facts right.It's pretty clear to anyone who actually watched that it was a Nike/Wimbledon official who brought it on court, asking him to wear it.

And yeah of course Fed not knowing about the jacket is ridiculous.It suits your little narrative.Fact though is that Fed made it clear he didn't.Infact,nobody would've as much as noticed it had Sue Barker not pointed it out in the interview.

 

[mandy01]

Watch the trophy presentation, when the woman asks what he has on the back of the jacket he knew exactly where to look and he even pointed out the 15 with his hand. Funny how he didn't know, he's def lying about that one which isn't a first.

That is because the guy who brought it to him told him it was there.I'm sure if Fed knew Sue & the press was going to make a big deal out of it, he'd have just left it there.But given the fact that he'd just won a 15th slam,I highly doubt he had the clairvoyance

 

[abmk]

No it wasn't. It was a combination of both Davy playing at his best and Fed a little off and Nadal playing very well and Djoko playing well. Because Rafa's form was very good, he made it seem like Djoko was an easier opponent and because Davy played well and Fed was a little off Davy seemed like the tougher opponent. As for Verdasco, yes obviously AO09 semi was tougher for Nadal than 2010 USO final, but if I could pick and choose I would rather have Nadal face Verdasco than Djokovic in a GS final anyday. Davy didn't have the nerve to beat Fed when he had the chance, Verdasco held his nerve till the last point. But Djoko has proved that he HAS the nerve to beat the best in GS competition and that's what makes him a tougher opponent. Also you cannot compare Davy's performance with Verdasco's, he didn't win 2 sets and take it to Fed in the fifth, he lost in 4.

@ bold part, so would I in normal circumstances obviously , but if you compare 2009 AO SF verdy to 2010 USO djoker, you'd say verdy was tougher, right ? you did already .... my point !

I wasn't comparing davy's performance to verdasco there..

Doesn't need to, they are 2 different tournaments on 2 different surfaces and therefore you cannot say that Murray would've lost to Fed JUST because he lost to him at the Aus Open. Fed had played some of the best tennis of his life at the Aus open in 2010 but that wasn't the case at Wim 09.

at wim 09, he did play very well till the finals , in the finals he served exceptionally as well ... I can't obviously prove that murray would've lost to federer, but the probability is very high and the probability that he could've challenged fed as much as roddick did is very low .. so I don't see any point in bi*ching about fed not facing murray or even djoker for that matter

Yes it is a very significant achievement and probably will never be repeated, but again you misinterpret me. Fed gets over-confident when he feels no threat whatsoever from his opponent and that happens sometimes, not every single time. The 15 on the jacket is the prime example.

I think others have already addressed this

Nonsense, how can it be a GREAT when one guy only won one set? It was very good, but not one of the greats and IMO the 09 USO final was better than the 04 Wimb final you give that match too much credit. Again if it wasn't for the bias in these forums I'd create a poll to see which match was better and the 09USO would win hands down if everyone was objective.

LOL, what a joke ! so agassi-sampras USO 2001 QF wasn't a great match !?

delpo-fed was dramatic, but not that high quality ... the flaws being:

jmdp only "awoke" at the end of the 2nd set ... he DF'ed twice to give the 3rd set away

federer was serving cr*p throughout, the worst he's ever served in a GS and wasn't that solid off the ground either ..both players ended up wqith negative W/UE ratio

also read again, I said , if we use the word great loosely and put fed-jmdp as a great match, then fed-roddick wim 04 also qualifies, considering it was of better quality

I meant the info for aces and service holds.

that info is there in the threads here somewhere, I'll dig it up soon

If you watched the USO match it was obvious that Rafa was missing a few shots that he normally wouldn't and once he rectified that he took the match in a breeze. Plus Verdasco was not playing at the level he played in 09 AO he played as his normal self. That performance at the AO was one of a kind just like Roddick at 09 Wimby and will most likely never be repeated again. It was also better than Davy's performance at 06AO where Fed clearly wasn't sharp. But don't get me wrong, Davy did play very well, but Davy's nerves cost him sets and ultimately the match whereas Verdasco held his nerve for most of the Nadal match apart from the final point.

no, verdasco could've played better in USO 2010 ... it wasn't nadal

let me give you another example, just illustrating why I am criticising verdy's performance ..

fed creamed jmdp in AO 2009 QF, didn't he ? was it just because fed was so good that day ... no , it was also because delpo gave up after a set and half. So that deserves criticism regardless of how well fed was playing ... just because he was the no6 seed, should I say it wasn't a clownish performance ?

again verdy's performance in AO 2009 SF was better than davy's in AO 2006, no doubt ..

C'mon we are talking about a guy who split his own head open with his racquet. Yes he is that dumb.

anger is different from stupidity

Just to reiterate that Fed didn't really have that much of a chance either in that form especially.

he was playing well till the semis.. he had an off-day vs djoker ... he could've played well in the finals

Hamburg was on clay of course he wasn't going to win that. It was 1 all in the YEC at the time, 4 GS matches and the Olympics. 3 of those GS matches were at the FO 06 07 and 08 I believe and the other at Wimbledon. C'mon it's not like he was ever going to win those and the Wimby match he was injured and had to retire. They were not HC encounters, the Olympics was the only HC match that mattered and that went the distance.

So based on all those FO GS losses + the Wimbledon one you've come to the conclusion that Djoko could not possibly beat Rafa yet Fed could when he has a worse record including on HC? WOW. Just wow.

1 all in YEC, but the match that djoker won didn't matter at all ... the match that rafa won mattered ... so did olympics ( funnily enough djoker creamed rafa at cincy just a few days before, yet when it mattered more, rafa came on top again , even on fast HC )

plus the fact is fed has achieved a hell lot more than djoker has and in a GS would be tougher for rafa than djoker who hasn't won against nadal in a match that mattered , not a single one

as far as hamburg 2008 is concerned, yes, it was clay, but djoker had his chances and the last set was MUCH closer than what the score suggests

oh and another factor that I forgot to mention, djoker's serve has gone down quite a bit since todd martin ( he joined with him in 2009 end I believe ), especially the 2nd serve ... so that edge of djoker that used to be there in their earlier matches, isn't just there

oh and fed's and djoker's records vs rafa were exactly 7-14 at that time ...with djoker having played more matches on HC ..

Well I doubt he wouldn't feel that way in his first 4 rounds. Once he gets to the finals it depends on who he plays.

LOL ! you don't win that much if you are over-confident ... if anything one of fed's best qualities is that he was so consistent against even the lower-ranked players, unlike say a sampras ... he didn't give them sniffs ... if he were that arrogant/over-confident, surely more players would've caused him trouble ... But no, he was more dominant than almost anyone in his best 4 years

Yeah then you went on about all of Poo's pre-injury achievements to try and pump up his tyres.

LOL, what a joke, you are the one who can't read/twists me saying a good/decent opponent into a tough opponent and say I was pumping scud up ?:lol:

No he didn't play fairly well at all after that first set he had treatment on his shoulder and lost a lot of flare on his serve and groundstrokes. Even that first set he was kept in it by a series of Fed errors.

But hey don't take my word for it...

http://www.lattimore.id.au/2007/01/29/australian-open-winner-2007-roger-federer/

You obviously just looked up the AO 07 final score and based your match analysis on that alone. Read the damn article I posted with egg on your face pal. It's obviously you who doesn't watch the matches.

Every opponent in comparison to Rafa is >>> but Safin just the one < yeah? What a load of shi.t! If you did consider the circumstances and realised that Safin went through the entire draw in either 4 or 5 sets (the majority 5) then you would put a fresh Djoko >>>>> a VERY buggered Safin. He put up no resistance in that final yet he's only slightly easier than Djoko.

I obviously watch more matches than you, who just goes to wikipedia and says "OOH look! That match had a tiebreak and two 6-4 sets so it must've been tough!". Gimme a break.

LOL, what a load of cr*p ... I saw that match and gonzo played fairly decent tennis throughout (best tennis was in the first set though ) , MUCH better than the cr*p berdych put up against rafa in wim 2010 ... I already said he didn't play as well as he did in the previous two matches, didn't I ?

Does that article say gonzo played crappily after the first set no .. it just says his form went down after the first, which is true and I agreed with that ...

the one who can't even get the score right talks about others not seeing the match :lol:

regarding safin and fed, safin was tired, but it wasn't that he couldn't move at all, his BH was still holding up and if it weren't fed at the other side of the net, he'd surely have played better considering he knew his chances would increase

Anyways it was more in response to your BS that AO 2004 was an easy draw , what a JOKE !!!!

 

[abmk]

And you say I can't read? Where did I say I wasn't aware of those guys? I'm aware of them, but i'm not one of them, try and find one thread where at the start of the tourny I say Fed's got a cakewalk draw. If you don't approve of their posts go and bother them about it, I'm only commenting on what I read in this thread and responded accordingly.

umm, firstly, I didn't say you were among them , did I ?

secondly, if you were aware of those guys/threads, then why are you bi*ching about people saying rafa had an easy draw in one tourney ? You know it was expected after all the sh*t load the *******s have put on those threads !

 

[mandy01]

Rubbish, the footage I've seen is a far shot of the whole court, then it shows the players box, then it goes back to that far shot then it shows Sampras then it goes back to the far shot where the guy is walking towards Fed. So how can you possibly tell me from that, that the old man didn't take it out of his kitbag, walk back to talk to some official and then walk over and hand it to Roger? The footage is inconclusive.

Why on earth would Roger need an old man wearing a kilt to take out a jacket from his own kitbag and give it to him?
Gosh,this is seriously laughable.It's more than obvious the jacket wasn't with him.But continue spewing your lies.
"footage is inconclusive" What BS.
And look at the speculative argument this chap makes-"old man could've done this,could've done that,walk back here,do this, do that".All speculation and nothing concrete to justify his accusation.

 

[mandy01]

whatever if you want to say he lied then whatever. he said that he did not know about it...roger has always said that he was very appreciative of his relationship with nike they sponsored him from the beginning and when he resigned his contracted in like 2006 or 2005 they game him one of the highest contracts ever for a tennis player because he only made like a million (might have been per year) when he first started to do really well in 2004...

Exactly.From what Roger said the man came on court and asked him if he could wear the jacket-he said okay.If Nike wanted to pay its biggest tennis star a bit of a tribute for his achievements and all the $$$$$$$ he brings in for them what problem do Rafatardfanboys have? That number wasn't even visible till Sue Barker actually pointed at it.Really,such babies..

 

[nadal_slam_king]

Exactly.From what Roger said the man came on court and asked him if he could wear the jacket-he said okay.If Nike wanted to pay its biggest tennis star a bit of a tribute for his achievements and all the $$$$$$$ he brings in for them what problem do Rafat*#dfanboys have? That number wasn't even visible till Sue Barker actually pointed at it.Really,such babies..

Yikes hope you don't get banned for that, you do know any use of the term "t*#d" is a bannable offense on this board now. I won't report you and I hope everybody else gives you a 2nd chance too, this is just a warning. If you quickly edit it out of your post, should be alright.

 

[msc886]

Surely that's a joke. That 5 setter had 2 very short sets and was not that greulling like Safin v Agassi and Roddick. Plus a series of 4-5 setters takes more out of you both physically and mentally than just the one. Plus Djokovic didn't show any tiring signs because that match was continuously interrupted by rain. He didn't gas out he gave up hope.

Go and read Mustard's post and you will understand the difference.

Yes Safin was exhausted but even then his level of play is still on par with Djokovics. Safin is simply a better player. I mean a washed up Safin took out Djokovic in 08 Wimby in straight sets and don't use the surface excuse because grass is Safin's worst surface as well. As for USO 2010, if you think Djokovic put up a fight then you can't really say Federer's GS final oppoents didn't put up a fight because it was exactly like Djokovic (strong start, worse as match progressed and lost hope). Like djokovic, Safin "lost hope" in 04AO. I mean Safin in AO05 had an epic battle with Federer beforehand while Hewitt had the easier match and he whooped Hewitt after the 1st set. Did exhaustion affect him? because if it did, his timing (which is important for his game) would be really off and Hewitt being the type of player he is would have grinded him out. It proved that fatigue was irrelevent for Safin's case. Also a tired safin does not take away from the fact that Federer beat guys who owned him before in AO04.


On top of that, these guys are pros who make a living in this harsh world. Performing under fatigue is a requirement so can't really use it as an excuse. You try using the "tired" excuse to your boss and see what happens.

 

[mandy01]

Yikes hope you don't get banned for that, you do know any use of the term "t*#d" is a bannable offense on this board now. I won't report you and I hope everybody else gives you a 2nd chance too, this is just a warning. If you quickly edit it out of your post, should be alright.

Yeah and I suppose calling people '****s' is okay,is it?Go back to your cave.

If the word really is a bannable offence I suspect we will be informed about it and so far I haven't seen any notification of such sorts.

 

[nadal_slam_king]

Yeah and I suppose calling people '****s' is okay,is it?Go back to your cave.

If the word really is a bannable offence I suspect we will be informed about it and so far I haven't seen any notification of such sorts.

That f-word you speak of was born from the t-word, in retaliation. I've never used that f-word and I'm not sure if it's been banned too, but I suspect it may have been. I think the t-word was banned more because it has the derogatory link to mental retardation.

 

[aphex]

Yikes hope you don't get banned for that, you do know any use of the term "t*#d" is a bannable offense on this board now. I won't report you and I hope everybody else gives you a 2nd chance too, this is just a warning. If you quickly edit it out of your post, should be alright.

Lol at Nadal_****_king pretending he has some kind of authority

 

[Sharpshooter]

@ bold part, so would I in normal circumstances obviously , but if you compare 2009 AO SF verdy to 2010 USO djoker, you'd say verdy was tougher, right ? you did already .... my point !

I wasn't comparing davy's performance to verdasco there..

Verdy played the match of his life against Rafa. Davy didn't play the best match in his life, he played well but Fed wasn't as sharp either which lead him into the match. If Davy had stronger nerves who knows maybe he would've won but the mental side is also part of tennis. That match was tougher than normal because of this but I watched that match and Fed could've played better and if he did, it would've been over quicker. Rafa was playing very well and Verdasco was playing out of his skin, it wasn't Rafa's poor execution that got Verdy into the match. BTW Fed's W/UE ratio was in the negative and Davy's was well into the negative. Fed also had poor return point winning % in that match as well and so did Davy. So yes the match was tough, but Fed could play better than that. If he had sharp form llike Rafa did in the USO final than the match wouldn't have been as close. When you factor that in then you have to also say that Djoko was a tougher opponent than Davy.

Observe:

AO06 stats:

Fed
Winners: 46 -> U Errors: 52 -6

Davy
Winners: 30 -> U Errors: 48 -18!

USO2010 stats:

Rafa
Winners: 49 -> U Errors: 31 +18

Djoko
Winners: 45 -> U Errors: 47 -2

So can you see now? Rafa played in sharp form and Fed didn't plus Djoko also played better than Davy. Therefore Nadal MADE Djoko look like an easier opponent when in reality he wasn't, his game was a lot more solid than Davy's.

at wim 09, he did play very well till the finals , in the finals he served exceptionally as well ... I can't obviously prove that murray would've lost to federer, but the probability is very high and the probability that he could've challenged fed as much as roddick did is very low .. so I don't see any point in bi*ching about fed not facing murray or even djoker for that matter

Fed would not have had as much confidence if he had to face Murray or Djoko when compared to Roddick. This is because they are the ones who apart from Rafa have consistently given him trouble over the past few years, not Roddick! So saying that the probability of them losing to Fed was a lot higher than Roddick is just crap. Roddick challenged Fed and guess what, he came up short again. Had Murray or Djoko challenged Fed, chances are better that they would've won because they have the belief that they can beat him whereas Roddick doesn't. As I said before, he knew he could do well and push him, but he didn't know if he could actually beat him because he had only won 2/20 matches ATT, not something that instils a lot of confidence.

I think others have already addressed this

You mean the other ****s? Having Nike even make that jacket is arrogant crap.

LOL, what a joke ! so agassi-sampras USO 2001 QF wasn't a great match !?

IMO no. Don't get me wrong it was very very good, no breaks of serve BUT to me for it to be a GREAT match it needs to go the distance, it needs that tug of war at the end and that extra bit of drama.

delpo-fed was dramatic, but not that high quality ... the flaws being:

jmdp only "awoke" at the end of the 2nd set ... he DF'ed twice to give the 3rd set away

federer was serving cr*p throughout, the worst he's ever served in a GS and wasn't that solid off the ground either ..both players ended up wqith negative W/UE ratio

The Davy Fed match wasn't high quality either than because the W/UE ratio was a lot worse (thanks to Davy). They had only a marginally negative ratio anyway but the quality wasn't too bad. Besides that isn't the only thing that should be considered to determine if a match is great. You also consider drama in terms of how close it is and in the fifth set when it's anybody's match, the drama is at its highest esp in a GS final. So 04 Wimby was high quality but it lacked the dramatic end it deserved to be called a great. To me it doesn't get any better than a 5 set GS final as long as the quality isn't too bad which was the case in the 09 USO final.

also read again, I said , if we use the word great loosely and put fed-jmdp as a great match, then fed-roddick wim 04 also qualifies, considering it was of better quality

See previous comment.

that info is there in the threads here somewhere, I'll dig it up soon

Thanks.

no, verdasco could've played better in USO 2010 ... it wasn't nadal

let me give you another example, just illustrating why I am criticising verdy's performance ..

fed creamed jmdp in AO 2009 QF, didn't he ? was it just because fed was so good that day ... no , it was also because delpo gave up after a set and half. So that deserves criticism regardless of how well fed was playing ... just because he was the no6 seed, should I say it wasn't a clownish performance ?

That's actually what I said re Verdasco at USO2010. He played as his normal self nowhere near his best and Rafa played well that's why the match was over quick. learn to READ!!!

At the start Rafa didn't quite find his range yet, so if he kept that form up in the whole match it would've obviously been closer.

anger is different from stupidity

LOL admit he's a nutcase and move on. If you do something stupid whether it's out of anger or not, it still is something stupid you can't just take that fact away.

he was playing well till the semis.. he had an off-day vs djoker ... he could've played well in the finals

That's why I said in that form especially. learn to READ!!! (See I can do this too)

1 all in YEC, but the match that djoker won didn't matter at all ... the match that rafa won mattered ... so did olympics ( funnily enough djoker creamed rafa at cincy just a few days before, yet when it mattered more, rafa came on top again , even on fast HC )

Olympics was the only important one that Djoko lost ATT. That YEC RR match was only important to Nadal, even if Djoko would've beat him in straights he still wouldn't have qualified in the top 2 of that group because Ferrer and Gasquet would've gone through so there goes your argument there. So correction - 1 important match on HC and that went the distance too.

plus the fact is fed has achieved a hell lot more than djoker has and in a GS would be tougher for rafa than djoker who hasn't won against nadal in a match that mattered , not a single one

Considering it was only one important match on HC that's not really a big deal.
As for Fed, he definitely has achieved more than Djoker, but the one thing he hasn't was a successful outdoor HC h2h. Rafa has his number there 3-1 and one in a GS final.

as far as hamburg 2008 is concerned, yes, it was clay, but djoker had his chances and the last set was MUCH closer than what the score suggests

Yes it was I remember that last set but at the end of the day it was clay and you can't really blame Djoko for losing that one against one of, if not the greatest clay courter in history.

oh and another factor that I forgot to mention, djoker's serve has gone down quite a bit since todd martin ( he joined with him in 2009 end I believe ), especially the 2nd serve ... so that edge of djoker that used to be there in their earlier matches, isn't just there

So why couldn't Fed beat him then? Give Djoko some credit man he was playing his best probably ever in that tourny after rd1.

oh and fed's and djoker's records vs rafa were exactly 7-14 at that time ...with djoker having played more matches on HC ..

Still doesn't improve Fed's outdoor HC h2h record. 6-3 >>> 1-3.

LOL ! you don't win that much if you are over-confident ... if anything one of fed's best qualities is that he was so consistent against even the lower-ranked players, unlike say a sampras ... he didn't give them sniffs ... if he were that arrogant/over-confident, surely more players would've caused him trouble ... But no, he was more dominant than almost anyone in his best 4 years

And when does being over confident against guys ranked way lower than you qualify you to lose more often? He was over confident and waaay more skillful that's why he didn't have much trouble in those rounds.

LOL, what a joke, you are the one who can't read/twists me saying a good/decent opponent into a tough opponent and say I was pumping scud up ?:lol:

No pal, you can't read, I've caught you out twice just in this post. You called Roddick good and tough in your posts so you can't blame me for thinking you meant scud was tough too.

LOL, what a load of cr*p ... I saw that match and gonzo played fairly decent tennis throughout (best tennis was in the first set though ) , MUCH better than the cr*p berdych put up against rafa in wim 2010 ... I already said he didn't play as well as he did in the previous two matches, didn't I ?

No he didn't play well throughout that's BS and you obviously didn't watch that match. He required treatment to his shoulder after the first set and then his serves and groundstrokes were noticeably less penetrative. That third set score was flattering and I remember watching it and seeing Gonzo get dealt with easily, hence the reason I thought the score was 6-2 but again that was only off memory not wikipedia like you pal.

 

[Sharpshooter]

Does that article say gonzo played crappily after the first set no .. it just says his form went down after the first, which is true and I agreed with that ...

No you said he played fairly well. I don't think you can say he performed fairly well when he only had chances in one set and was only kept in the first by Fed's errors.

the one who can't even get the score right talks about others not seeing the match :lol:

Again, according to my memory Gonzo got beat convincingly after the first set and he did. You didn't see the match, you just looked up the score on wikipedia and thought "oh yeah two 6-4 sets, Gonzo must've played fairly well" when in reality, Fed's first set was riddled with UE's which is why it was so close and Gonzo's form dropped after the first because he had a slight shoulder injury, enough to hinder his performance. The third set score was VERY flattering. Hardly the performance of a guy who played fairly well. Plus Roddick played rubbish and Fed played really well in that semi so therefore we can now establish that 03 Wim and 07 AO were easier draws than USO2010.

regarding safin and fed, safin was tired, but it wasn't that he couldn't move at all, his BH was still holding up and if it weren't fed at the other side of the net, he'd surely have played better considering he knew his chances would increase

Of course he could move, again it's time you learn to read because I never suggested any such thing. Safin lacked the stamina to give it his best which was clearly evident through the performance he gave the very next year. Djoko was very fresh and did play his best tourny at USO2010 so he was MUCH tougher than 04 Safin.

Anyways it was more in response to your BS that AO 2004 was an easy draw , what a JOKE !!!!

It was an easy draw. Hewitt put up no challenge at all after the first set and got bageled, Nalbandian was down 2 sets to 0 then Fed lost a little concentration towards the end of the third before picking up the pieces in the 4th. Then he was against JCF and Safin, both of those guys were nowhere near as tough as Djoko.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

You guys should really let this go.

 

[abmk]

Fed would not have had as much confidence if he had to face Murray or Djoko when compared to Roddick. This is because they are the ones who apart from Rafa have consistently given him trouble over the past few years, not Roddick! So saying that the probability of them losing to Fed was a lot higher than Roddick is just crap. Roddick challenged Fed and guess what, he came up short again. Had Murray or Djoko challenged Fed, chances are better that they would've won because they have the belief that they can beat him whereas Roddick doesn't. As I said before, he knew he could do well and push him, but he didn't know if he could actually beat him because he had only won 2/20 matches ATT, not something that instils a lot of confidence.

djoker was struggling throughout grass and murray couldn't even get past roddick , all indications point towards that the probability that they would challenge an in-form fed or even a federer who was serving that well is pretty small ... there is no point in bit*hing about fed not facing a top 5 opponent when roddick played that well and gave him a stern test ...

You mean the other ****s? Having Nike even make that jacket is arrogant crap.

LOL, whatever suits your boat

IMO no. Don't get me wrong it was very very good, no breaks of serve BUT to me for it to be a GREAT match it needs to go the distance, it needs that tug of war at the end and that extra bit of drama.

The Davy Fed match wasn't high quality either than because the W/UE ratio was a lot worse (thanks to Davy). They had only a marginally negative ratio anyway but the quality wasn't too bad. Besides that isn't the only thing that should be considered to determine if a match is great. You also consider drama in terms of how close it is and in the fifth set when it's anybody's match, the drama is at its highest esp in a GS final. So 04 Wimby was high quality but it lacked the dramatic end it deserved to be called a great. To me it doesn't get any better than a 5 set GS final as long as the quality isn't too bad which was the case in the 09 USO final.


See previous comment.

LOL ...no , quality is the first and foremost for a match to be called great ... 5 set is not a requirement

there are quite a few matches that go the distance , and are even dramatic, but do not make the cut as great matches

besides this match wasn't even that close in the 5th set

That's actually what I said re Verdasco at USO2010. He played as his normal self nowhere near his best and Rafa played well that's why the match was over quick. learn to READ!!!

At the start Rafa didn't quite find his range yet, so if he kept that form up in the whole match it would've obviously been closer.

verdy played below his normal self ... he played MUCH better in the prev match vs ferrer for example ...

LOL admit he's a nutcase and move on. If you do something stupid whether it's out of anger or not, it still is something stupid you can't just take that fact away.

so basically you are saying nadal faced a player who is a nutcase, displayed that on that occasion, yet you object to me calling his performance a clownish one ? :lol:

That's why I said in that form especially. learn to READ!!! (See I can do this too)

I did , clueless, which is why I separated the two possibilities ( in my previous post as well )

Yes it was I remember that last set but at the end of the day it was clay and you can't really blame Djoko for losing that one against one of, if not the greatest clay courter in history.

maybe, but you can't deny he had his chances, but didn't grab it

as much as he is/was hyped as nadal's toughest opponent on clay, he hasn't beaten him once or taken a set off him at RG

So why couldn't Fed beat him then? Give Djoko some credit man he was playing his best probably ever in that tourny after rd1.

a) because fed played a medicore match, he was absolutely cr*p in some parts

b) I called djoker a worthy opponent already in so many of my previous posts, that is called giving credit ... doesn't mean his serve, which was an edge against rafa in their previous encounters, hasn't gone down ... nice try though :roll:

No pal, you can't read, I've caught you out twice just in this post. You called Roddick good and tough in your posts so you can't blame me for thinking you meant scud was tough too.

I didn't call roddick in wim 2003 tough, I said roddick and scud in wim 2003 were good opponents that's it ... obviously I can't say the opponent is uniformly tough every time, it depends on the context

No he didn't play well throughout that's BS and you obviously didn't watch that match. He required treatment to his shoulder after the first set and then his serves and groundstrokes were noticeably less penetrative. That third set score was flattering and I remember watching it and seeing Gonzo get dealt with easily, hence the reason I thought the score was 6-2 but again that was only off memory not wikipedia like you pal.

Even if we assume you watched the match, why would you state 2 were 6-2 sets if you were not sure about the scores ... you could've said the last sets were easy/relatively easy for fed ... But no, you pulled the nos 6-2 for the 2nd 3rd sets out of your a**, that's what happened.

 

[abmk]

No you said he played fairly well. I don't think you can say he performed fairly well when he only had chances in one set and was only kept in the first by Fed's errors.



Again, according to my memory Gonzo got beat convincingly after the first set and he did. You didn't see the match, you just looked up the score on wikipedia and thought "oh yeah two 6-4 sets, Gonzo must've played fairly well" when in reality, Fed's first set was riddled with UE's which is why it was so close and Gonzo's form dropped after the first because he had a slight shoulder injury, enough to hinder his performance. The third set score was VERY flattering. Hardly the performance of a guy who played fairly well. Plus Roddick played rubbish and Fed played really well in that semi so therefore we can now establish that 03 Wim and 07 AO were easier draws than USO2010.

LOL, so now roddick played rubbish, ( he did make some clownish approaches, but it wasn't an error-filled performance ) but you object to me calling verdy's and youzhny's performances in USO 2010 as clownish. What amazing double standards :lol:

I've already replied to our cr*p regarding the AO 2007 final in the previous post

Of course he could move, again it's time you learn to read because I never suggested any such thing. Safin lacked the stamina to give it his best which was clearly evident through the performance he gave the very next year. Djoko was very fresh and did play his best tourny at USO2010 so he was MUCH tougher than 04 Safin.


It was an easy draw. Hewitt put up no challenge at all after the first set and got bageled, Nalbandian was down 2 sets to 0 then Fed lost a little concentration towards the end of the third before picking up the pieces in the 4th. Then he was against JCF and Safin, both of those guys were nowhere near as tough as Djoko.

so if fed got up 2 sets to love against nalbandian, his nemesis till then ( he only got his first win vs him in TMC 2003 ), he's not a tough opponent. No credit to fed ? LOL !

hewitt was what , 7-2 against fed at that point ? not that hewitt played that well, but by no means an easy opponent unlike a lopez, verdy or youzhny in USO 2010