US Open

wr8_utd said:
What is there to worry? The final would be Fed/Djoko's 3rd game in 5 days while it would be Rafa/Youzny's 3rd game in 4 days. And also given the fact that despite not being number one anymore Fed YET got the added benefit of starting the USO 3 days before the current world number 1 how exactly is fitness a worry for Fed? :confused:

Don't you think winning 9 slams and completing a career golden slam at the age of 24 for a one court wonder against the so called "greatest player in the history of tennis" in 6 of those 9 slams as almost as good as what Fed did against the likes of Roddick and Hewitt?
Click to expand...

Because he's 5 years older than Nadal and Nadal's a better athlete.

Age is irrelevant when we're talking about the greats, it's how you end up that matters. He'll probably reach the level of Agassi if he does it, not Federer, Sampras or Borg.

Honestly, I don't buy the whole 'field was easier' business. Nadal has won most of his grandslams on clay where his competition is practically nothing. Worse than Federer has had on any surface. His only competition was a Federer still getting to grips with the surface.

So rather than taking away credit from Nadal and Federer I'd like to give it to them, because I genuinely believe that it's not just great players that make the competition tough, it's also the depth of quality, which is very good these days. Even someone like Del Potro who isn't in the top 3 or 4, I think, can be unplayable on his day.
 
Jopub said:
Really mate you're wasting your time - you're talking to Nadal's unknown twin brother there :D
Click to expand...

Haha

To be fair, I'm a little biased too. There are just some sights in sport that you take away with your for a long time. Federer playing tennis is one of them. Those years when he was at his peak was just a treat to watch, noone these days comes close to that for me.

And the other would be Sachin Tendulkar, the Indian cricketer. Absolute genius. The one person I have been, and always will be a fanboi of :)
 
And I'd like to add that no, Rafter wasn't THAT great a player. He was just good. Had he been around when Federer was making every final, he wouldn't have had much of a sniff of winning anything. So you have to put these things into perspective when you're talking about he 'great' competition of the past. IMO some players in these last ten years would have been looked at very differently had Federer and now Nadal not so consistently been in the semis all the time.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
And I'd like to add that no, Rafter wasn't THAT great a player. He was just good. Had he been around when Federer was making every final, he wouldn't have had much of a sniff of winning anything. So you have to put these things into perspective when you're talking about he 'great' competition of the past. IMO some players in these last ten years would have been looked at very differently had Federer and now Nadal not so consistently been in the semis all the time.
Click to expand...

Well he had Agassi and Sampras to contend with and he yet had 2 Slams and 2 finals at Wimbledon which is far more than can be said about our current number 3 or 4.

Rafa and Roger are brilliant but the rest of the current field is pretty average.

And the 2 back to back US Opens that he won, he beat Agassi, Chang and Sampras. I'm not sure a Djokovic would have beaten any of those.
 
wr8_utd said:
Well he had Agassi and Sampras to contend with and he yet had 2 Slams and 2 finals at Wimbledon which is far more than can be said about our current number 3 or 4.

Rafa and Roger are brilliant but the rest of the current field is pretty average.

And the 2 back to back US Opens that he won, he beat Agassi, Chang and Sampras. I'm not sure a Djokovic would have beaten any of those.
Click to expand...

Listen, when you start out making scenarios to 'fit' your great/greatest player theory's you can really end up looking silly

Pat fking Rafter was not a 'great'

Anybody who has watched tennis for the last 40 odd years will quickly and effectively be able to end any argument you can put up on that score

Rafter was a top professional who peaked at the right time and got his just deserts by winning a couple of well deserved majors - in fact he and his compatriot, Pat Cash are a shining light for what can be achieved without being fantastically talented at a given sport but got what they did from sheer hard work and focus and concentrating on what they did best whilst maybe other 'better' more gifted players underestimated them to their cost.

You sound like a 'plastic' tennis fan who started watching it 5 years ago who woke up one morning with a stonking 'boner' for Rafa Nadal
 
wr8_utd said:
Well he had Agassi and Sampras to contend with and he yet had 2 Slams and 2 finals at Wimbledon which is far more than can be said about our current number 3 or 4.

Rafa and Roger are brilliant but the rest of the current field is pretty average.

And the 2 back to back US Opens that he won, he beat Agassi, Chang and Sampras. I'm not sure a Djokovic would have beaten any of those.
Click to expand...

Why can't Djokovic beat them? He's a brilliant talent with a very complete game, can beat anyone when on form. I can't see how he's an 'average' player. He's not won more than one major title mainly because he keeps running into Federer, who I'm sure he'll eventually beat (could start tonight).

Rafter was a good player. Nothing more really. He worked hard and grafted most of the time.
 
CheadleBeagle said:
I hope Roger wins this as it could be one of his last Slams as he is 29. I do think he could win another Wimbledon if fit. It is always hard to compare different champions as they are never at their peak at the same time. I think Roger was at his peak probably 3 or 4 years ago and that Roger would have beaten today's Nadal except on clay. Nadal is great but still too one dimensional and defensive although he is improving into a more attacking player. Unfortunately for Roger because they have changed the grass at Wimbledon and are using heavier balls it is easier for Nadal to win there than it is for Roger to win in Paris. I doubt Pete Sampras, Edberg and Rafter would do well at Wimbledon now as it is so hard to be really aggressive on the grass with the slow conditions. The serve and volley game has just about gone. Anyway I hope Clijsters wins tomorrow and Roger on Sunday if he can get past Djokovic. He will probably have the tougher semi so it will be hard for him to be rested for Sunday. I still think Roger is the greatest ever and it will be up to Nadal to win more grand slams if he wants that title.
Click to expand...

This argument is soo overused by people who only see what they want to, a quick search will show you that the last time Wimbledon increased the pressure inside the Slazenger balls was in 1995, and that was by 2%, it has stayed the same ever since, so if Nadal benefited from it, then so did Federer. Blame racquet technology if you must find something to hold responsible. Also, almost every year during Wimbledon when players say they notice a speed change, they always ask the Wimbledon groundsman, and the answer is that the grass composition hasn't changed in about a decade, when they switched to 30% rye which affects the ball bounce more than court speed. So everything Nadal has "benefited" from doesn't seem to have affected Federer in the negative at all. It's slower than the Sampras era, but hasn't changed in the Federer era.
 
Allforone said:
Nadal will win the USO, winning 3 out of the 4 slams this year, achieving the carear grand slam at the age of 24 and 9 slams so far in total......not bad for a one dimensional clay court bully.
Click to expand...
I really hope so. It's been such a shit sporting day, just hope he beats Youzny today.

amolbhatia100 said:
Why can't Djokovic beat them? He's a brilliant talent with a very complete game, can beat anyone when on form. I can't see how he's an 'average' player. He's not won more than one major title mainly because he keeps running into Federer, who I'm sure he'll eventually beat (could start tonight).

Rafter was a good player. Nothing more really. He worked hard and grafted most of the time.
Click to expand...

Hmm maybe he was not a "great" player but the very fact that even a "not great" player could win 2 titles in that time and beating players like Agassi and Sampras on the way shows how much more competitive the field was then. I'm not taking anything away from Federer. He's won slams on all the surfaces and his record of 16 will probably never be matched either but all I'm saying is he has had a inferior playing field compared to what there was before. Until Nadal came around and started beating him he din't even have any real competition. Someone like Roddick who was the world number 2 had something like a 0-11 record against Fed.
And to be honest Nadal is also a player with limited talent and skill but a really hard working player. He'll chase down everything. He's not good half as much skill as Fed does and yet he's on 9 slams,.
And as for Djoko beating Fed, that's not happening :p
Jopub said:
Listen, when you start out making scenarios to 'fit' your great/greatest player theory's you can really end up looking silly

Pat fking Rafter was not a 'great'

Anybody who has watched tennis for the last 40 odd years will quickly and effectively be able to end any argument you can put up on that score

Rafter was a top professional who peaked at the right time and got his just deserts by winning a couple of well deserved majors - in fact he and his compatriot, Pat Cash are a shining light for what can be achieved without being fantastically talented at a given sport but got what they did from sheer hard work and focus and concentrating on what they did best whilst maybe other 'better' more gifted players underestimated them to their cost.

You sound like a 'plastic' tennis fan who started watching it 5 years ago who woke up one morning with a stonking 'boner' for Rafa Nadal
Click to expand...

Erm no. I've been watching tennis for far longer than 5 years.
 
It won't be that easy a game... Youzny's beaten Nadal here before.
 
Allforone said:
Trust me, we had this discussion during wimbledon before he faced that french dude, you said hed struggle i said hed stroll......

Easy 3 sets, just you watch.

Djokervic to win a set off Federer before embaressing himself and losing in 4.
Click to expand...
Hehe no I was not worried about mathieue "the french dude" :p
It was Soderling and Murray I was worried about!

Hmm hopefully. Djokovic has been in great form but it's yet hard to see him beating Fed.
 
Incredibly nervy service hold there from Nadal. Had something like 8-9 game points and was 40-0 up before finally holding. 4-1 up now. looking good.
 
What a winner to take the set. Been good stuff from Nadal.

In other news Barca continue to lose to Hercules at the Nou Camp :lol:
 
Sloppy game at 2-1 there. Should really have broken Youzny. Anyway good hold now. 3-2.
 
wr8_utd said:
Hehe no I was not worried about mathieue "the french dude" :p
It was Soderling and Murray I was worried about!

Hmm hopefully. Djokovic has been in great form but it's yet hard to see him beating Fed.
Click to expand...

You really hate Federer and love Nadal!

I hope both win and Federer wins the final :D
 
Vamos Rafa! :D

Finally into the finals after so many failed attempts. Just one win from winning everything there is to win
 
I wonder who he'll prefer to meet between the two, 14-7H2H over both. He has the mental thing over Federer, but Federer has been serving really well, while Nadal hasn't been returning as good as he usually does. Djokovic has a good record against Nadal on hard courts despite the poor overall h2h.
 
I honestly think Nadal would prefer Federer, as you say everyone knows Nadals in Federers head especially Rafa, he mentally owns him, hes not just got a great H2H over Federer but also a great grand finals record over him to, where as Djokovic does cause him problems on Hard courts.

Id still expect Nadal to beat either pretty comfortably in the final.
 
Double break point for Djokovic to go 2-0 up :eek:

And the choking starts early tonight. 1-1
 
Allforone said:
I honestly think Nadal would prefer Federer, as you say everyone knows Nadals in Federers head especially Rafa, he mentally owns him, hes not just got a great H2H over Federer but also a great grand finals record over him to, where as Djokovic does cause him problems on Hard courts.

Id still expect Nadal to beat either pretty comfortably in the final.
Click to expand...

Pretty bold prediction, I'd be shocked if the final is easy and straightforward whether it's a Nadal win or loss. But yeah he'll probably prefer Federer, nothing like beating your biggest rival to in all four slam finals and completing a career slam too while Federer would love to be the one to stop him after all the past tears Nadal has caused him.
 
If Fed beats Novak, and then Rafa tomorrow, he'll having the biggest smile on his face that has ever graced this planet, ever
 
You must log in or register to reply here.