Who should be considered the US Open Fave - Rafa or Novak?

kevaninho said:
Yeah cos Raonic and Dimitrov are on fire these days, not, yet they gave Novak a tough match :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Stop going by names you've heard of and think of whos actually playing well.
Both Nadal and Djokovic beat Cilic. Nadal beat Wawrinka and then Djokovic's conqueror Tsitsipas . Not the toughest of draws but neither was Cinci for Djokovic.
Federer isn't even in form , so who did Djokovic face who was ever going to be a challenge? :rolleyes:
He was dropping sets to almost everyone he played.
Click to expand...

Djoko beat the Cincy GOAT you dimwit
 
KINGROGER said:
Yes true. 2008 RG final opponent was tougher than 2009 Wimbledon final opponent because Federer.
Click to expand...
? Any version of Federer is better than Roddick. Federer wasn't that bad at RG 2008, just Nadal was a monster that year. Even the best possible Clayderer (2011) losses to Nadal at RG, so 2008 and 2011 Federer doesn't make any difference for the King of clay.

Roddick is on a similar league to Juan Carlos Ferrero (both 1 GS, multiple GS finalists and former #1). Ferrero and Roddick are decent players compared with the rest of the field. But they are weak rivals for an all-time great.
 
Sport said:
? Any version of Federer is better than Roddick. Federer wasn't that bad at RG 2008, just Nadal was a monster that year. Even the best possible Clayderer (2011) losses to Nadal at RG, so 2008 and 2011 Federer doesn't make any difference for the King of clay.

Roddick is on a similar league to Juan Carlos Ferrero (both GS champions, multiple GS finalists and former #1). Ferrero and Roddick are decent players compared with the rest of the field. But they are weak rivals for an all-time great.
Click to expand...
Ah so 2008 RG Fed was a strong era tough opponent, while 2004/2009 Wimbledon Roddick were both weak opponents.

Cool.
 
KINGROGER said:
Ah so 2008 RG Fed was a strong era tough opponent, while 2004/2009 Wimbledon Roddick were both weak opponents.

Cool.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Roddick is similar to Ferrero (both 1 GS, multiple GS finals and a few weeks as #1). So comparing Roddick with Federer, makes so little sense as comparing Ferrero with Federer. Sorry if the red pill is difficult to assimilate.
 
Sport said:
Exactly. Roddick is similar to Ferrero (both 1 GS, multiple GS finals and a few weeks as #1). So comparing Roddick with Federer, makes so little sense as comparing Ferrero with Federer. Sorry if the red pill is difficult to assimilate.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. Federer in that 2008 RG final was a very strong opponent. Much tougher than 2009 W Roddick.
 
UnderratedSlam said:
Well, Nadal didn't "lose" to Cilic. Nadal was injured. I have no idea why some people never believe Rafa's injuries. So he exists QFs for fun, right?

I find it fascinating that some RF fans think so highly of several of RF's Weak Era slam wins (2003 Wimbledon, 2006 AO and so on) yet suddenly, somehow, the 2018 AO is "not that impressive, he had an easy draw". Newsflash: in the weak era most draws he had were easy because it was the weak era.

When a player doesn't convert a match point in a VERY close match, it's almost as if he won it - from the standpoint of FORM. We are talking about FORM, not results. His form is very good throughout the year, and yes, he lost in Halle, but it's not the first time he's lost in Halle. He is second in the race, so he must be doing everything wrong, is the logic here.
Click to expand...

Firstly, yes Nadal lost. If you're injured or not, if you don't win a match, you lose it. I'm not saying I don't believe his injuries but why do some people act like the match was only lost because of an injury? even if it is, tennis is a physical sport, if the other player is physically better than you, they are the better player on the day. Enough excuses. He xited the Qfs because someone beat him.

Most of the slams Fed won he had to go through someone decent, when i say AO 2018 was weaker draw wise i'm comparing to last's year's AO which was far harder.

Blowing match points also means he perhaps has been mentally weak. Losing from 2-0 in sets vs Anderson is not good. Fed's form has been poor this year, but if you want to believe something else fair enough
 
I’ve bet nadal on sky betting app. Good price. I think nadal has the mental edge over Djokovic at USO. Would love to see a Nadal Federer uso match.
 
Towser83 said:
Firstly, yes Nadal lost. If you're injured or not, if you don't win a match, you lose it. I'm not saying I don't believe his injuries but why do some people act like the match was only lost because of an injury? even if it is, tennis is a physical sport, if the other player is physically better than you, they are the better player on the day. Enough excuses. He xited the Qfs because someone beat him.
Click to expand...
I gather that perhaps you've never taken a racket into your hand with a leg, back or arm injury?

I would suggest that everyone tries it sometime, and then comment about matches when players are injured. It's easy to start looking at tennis matches as computer games in the coziness of one's sofa, but that stuff out there is real. The best judges of tennis are always people who have at least played it extensively, even on an amateur level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann
UnderratedSlam said:
I gather that perhaps you've never taken a racket into your hand with a leg, back or arm injury?

I would suggest that everyone tries it sometime, and then comment about matches when players are injured. It's easy to start looking at tennis matches as computer games in the coziness of one's sofa, but that stuff out there is real. The best judges of tennis are always people who have at least played it extensively, even on an amateur level.
Click to expand...

Look it doesn't matter if I have played tennis injured, uninjured or whatever, at the end of the day it's a physical sport so if one player is physically better than the other, they deserve to win. Stop making excuses and pretending a player didn't lose a match. He didn't even retire, so it's a loss whatever way you look at it.
 
Towser83 said:
Look it doesn't matter if I have played tennis injured, uninjured or whatever, at the end of the day it's a physical sport so if one player is physically better than the other, they deserve to win. Stop making excuses and pretending a player didn't lose a match. He didn't even retire, so it's a loss whatever way you look at it.
Click to expand...
Would you extend this amazing logic to the Seles knife attack in 1993?

I guess she should have sucked it up and won the match, rather than complain and stop the match - using your logic.

I.e. it doesn't matter HOW an injury occurs, an injury IMPEDES heavily on the match outcome. I feel silly even having to make this obvious point.

And thanks for admitting that you've never played tennis before. At least you're honest.
 
UnderratedSlam said:
Djokovic and RF are the only contenders for the title, Rafa can only go as far as the draw doesn't have him play one of those two meaning he can reach the finale if Novak isn't in his half. I am convinced Rafa will never again beat Federer (partly because RF isn't playing clay anymore), because this veteran Nadal is scared of Federer unlike the young Nadal who was fearless, and we know that Novak has his number whenever Djokovic is at his best. That USO 2013 defeat to Rafa was very close. Djokovic was up 4-1 in the third set, then suddenly allowed Rafa to come back. That won't ever happen again.

The fact Nadal is 2-1 vs Djokovic at the USO is a misleading stat.

Rafa fans should completely forget about a fourth USO title, won't happen.
Click to expand...
How can be 2-1 be misleading? If nadal had not got injured I’d have bet on a Nadal to beat Nole in the final...although indoors may have meant I lost my bet. Shame we didn’t get the face off really.
 
UnderratedSlam said:
Would you extend this amazing logic to the Seles knife attack in 1993?

I guess she should have sucked it up and won the match, rather than complain and stop the match - using your logic.

I.e. it doesn't matter HOW an injury occurs, an injury IMPEDES heavily on the match outcome. I feel silly even having to make this obvious point.

And thanks for admitting that you've never played tennis before. At least you're honest.
Click to expand...

Oh please, you're insulting everyone's intelligence here, especially your own. Getting stabbed has nothing to do with the actual playing of tennis does it?

If you're just not physically as good at playing tennis or you injure yourself in the act of playing tennis then physically you are inferior to your opponent. That doesn't apply to being stabbed, getting hit by a car or getting struck by lightning. I'll even exclude just random viruses/stomach bugs etc, though with general illness everyone probably gets them from time to time.

Really weak argument from you, you SHOULD feel silly because your argument is downright laughable. Of course it matters how your injury occurs. Getting stabbed is akin to vastly over-training or not putting in enough training and causing your own injury? Yeah right..

Btw I have played tennis, though only as a hobby in school
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

skypadq
nadal 's us open defend is gonna be so hard
Replies
7
Views
461
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
roysid
Federer at US open vs Djokovic at US Open
2 3 4
Replies
181
Views
4K
SonnyT
S
Yugram
  • Poll Poll
Greater US Open player: Nadal vs Djokovic | 2021 Edition
5 6 7
Replies
330
Views
10K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
G
  • Poll Poll
Peak Novak Djokovic vs peak Rafael Nadal at US Open, who wins?
2
Replies
99
Views
6K
SonnyT
S
skypadq
do you think us open court dosen 't suit well for novak djokovic ?
Replies
8
Views
403
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
Back
Top