US Open 2018, Flushing Meadows, NY USA - Grand Slam (Men)

[DarthFed]

I saw how well Roger played vs Stan and how poor and awful vs Novak

He was not good against either. He wasn't really good all week, just glimpses here and there. I'd say Novak's returning and baseline game put way more pressure on Roger than Stan. Roger on his worst day usually handles Stan on a fast court. Stan has shown some signs but I'd be surprised if he makes the semifinal or even QF.

 

[Moxie]

Pretty fucking ridiculous if it happens. Tennis/humanity needs to be saved again.

I can't believe you've taken to copy-catting a troll. I also don't believe that, as much as you'd like it to be true, you actually still think that Nadal is a one-dimensional dirt-baller. Because that would imply a pretty tenuous grasp on reality.

 

[Horsa]

I can't believe you've taken to copy-catting a troll. I also don't believe that, as much as you'd like it to be true, you actually still think that Nadal is a one-dimensional dirt-baller. Because that would imply a pretty tenuous grasp on reality.

I can't believe the influence Monfed is having on people. I thought that when I ignored Monfed I would have got away from his rude, nasty & ridiculous comments. Well, at least I don't have to see him call people names. I'm going to rant here. Sorry.

1st I thought it was disgusting him bandying the word cancer around as if it were good when a lot of people have had friends or family members suffer from it &/ die from it. It's a pestilential disease & people go from being well & healthy to either looking or sounding bad really quickly depending on the type of cancer. They're only a shadow of their former self. It's not nice to see/hear. You're almost in tears seeing/hearing them but trying not to be to stay strong for them.

2ndly I'm sick of the phrase "save humanity" used in the context as if Rafa winning is the end of the world when there is a lot more things going on in the world that are more important like wars, terrorism, suffering & climate change, etc.

3rdly I'm also sick of the phrases "save tennis" from Nadal when he plays & also "He doesn't play tennis", my response to that is "If he doesn't play tennis, what does he do & why is he a tennis player then?" & "He's anti-tennis" for which my response is "why did he choose to be a tennis player & why is he still a tennis player then?"

4thly I'm also sick of the comment that we should save history from Nadal being the greatest tennis player ever. History is in the past. Nothing can change history. I'd like to change a few things if I could change history but I can't. I'd like to make it so there were never any wars, Roman baths were kept up with instead of being forgotten for all those years, Jenner discovered vaccination earlier, Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin sooner & the true theory of circulation wasn't forgotten about for so long after Avicenna came up with it before Harvey rediscovered & proved it & blood groups were discovered earlier so blood transfusions could be done earlier which could have saved many more lives, in order for some of this to happen dissection of dead bodies would have had to have been allowed sooner, I'd have also have changed history so body-snatching didn't occur but I can't. What is done today can change future history but not history.

Last of all, I'm fed up of Ferrer being called ferret. I know where the nick-name comes from but don't think it's fair on either the tennis player or the animal. I'm sick of the attitude of some people in the world in general against these beautiful animals & not just because I used to have 4. They are escape artists who get into places that you can't & take advantage of this. I'm sick of the myth that they're rats. They're not even rodents. Their nearest relative is the Northern European polecat. They're mustellids. They come from the mustellidae group of animals along with Northern European polecats, stoats, weasels, pine martens, otters & badgers. They've been used for centuries to hunt rats & rabbits. I'm also sick of the myth they always smell. They don't always smell. They're also known as foumarts though because at 1 time they were thought to be in the marten section of the mustellid family of animals & they let off a smell when threatened like a skunk does. As long as they're happy they don't smell. The smell is a defence mechanism which is accompanied by a dance & them getting nasty. They also dance & make a dooking (laughing) sound when happy so whether to tell if they're happy or not is if they are dooking or not as they get nippy in play like little pups do but pups grow out of it. They're normally very friendly & loving animals when treated well. We stroked ours like a dog. I'm also sick of people thinking they're nasty when they're only nasty when angry or they feel threatened. I could have written a lot more about them but decided to keep it short.

Sorry for blowing off steam but I'm really hoping that common sense or at least common knowledge can be restored to this forum except of course when people are having a laugh.

 

[lob]

I can't believe the influence Monfed is having on people. I thought that when I ignored Monfed I would have got away from his rude, nasty & ridiculous comments. Well, at least I don't have to see him call people names. I'm going to rant here. Sorry.
...........................................................................

Sorry for blowing off steam but I'm really hoping that common sense or at least common knowledge can be restored to this forum except of course when people are having a laugh.

The context here is that many of us are just plain p*&%$#d off with Nadal's draw and for whatever reason he has been lucky with his draws Or, to be more generous, maybe we Roger fans notice it only when Nadal's draw is sweet. To watch Roger's legacy get eclipsed, and yes it is inexorably and definitively being eclipsed by Nadal right before our eyes, is certainly a tough pill to swallow. Any Roger fan who ruminates about how much more Roger might have accomplished will soon be relegated to the would've-should've-and-bitter camp.

Some, like Monfed may be inconsolable and more bitter. I'd say it is not entirely an overreaction to find it gutting to watch a 15 year emotional investment take a blow with finality.

 

[DarthFed]

I can't believe you've taken to copy-catting a troll. I also don't believe that, as much as you'd like it to be true, you actually still think that Nadal is a one-dimensional dirt-baller. Because that would imply a pretty tenuous grasp on reality.

Oh relax, it is kind of a joke. The world is an OK place even with Nadal's tennis achievements included. But the sooner he's gone the better the game will be, especially if he is/was what I think.

 

[DarthFed]

The context here is that many of us are just plain p*&%$#d off with Nadal's draw and for whatever reason he has been lucky with his draws Or, to be more generous, maybe we Roger fans notice it only when Nadal's draw is sweet. To watch Roger's legacy get eclipsed, and yes it is inexorably and definitively being eclipsed by Nadal right before our eyes, is certainly a tough pill to swallow. Any Roger fan who ruminates about how much more Roger might have accomplished will soon be relegated to the would've-should've-and-bitter camp.

Some, like Monfed may be inconsolable and more bitter. I'd say it is not entirely an overreaction to find it gutting to watch a 15 year emotional investment take a blow with finality.

Like I said before I really don't complain when someone gets a tough draw. Clearly to everyone not named Carol, Fed's draw looks pretty tough. I will, however, call a cake draw for what it is.

And with Nadal it has become a very regular occurrence in New York and that's really frustrating. It happens, I really thought Roger had an extreme cakewalk draw at RG in 2013 and 2015 and simply didn't take advantage, but with Nadal it's getting beyond frustrating at USO.

Also, Rafa still has work to do to eclipse Roger, but it looks likely especially if Fed remains the lame duck he's been since IW. He needs to wake up and realize his legacy is under attack. Screw his family life and everything else, this should be more important.

 

[Fiero425]

The context here is that many of us are just plain p*&%$#d off with Nadal's draw and for whatever reason he has been lucky with his draws Or, to be more generous, maybe we Roger fans notice it only when Nadal's draw is sweet. To watch Roger's legacy get eclipsed, and yes it is inexorably and definitively being eclipsed by Nadal right before our eyes, is certainly a tough pill to swallow. Any Roger fan who ruminates about how much more Roger might have accomplished will soon be relegated to the would've-should've-and-bitter camp.

Some, like Monfed may be inconsolable and more bitter. I'd say it is not entirely an overreaction to find it gutting to watch a 15 year emotional investment take a blow with finality.

Since I've been around for so long, this is something we all have had to live/deal with going back to the good ol' days when players like Laver, Court, Connors, & Evert ruled! Their legend was destined to be eclipsed! The players I hung my hat on were Borg & Navratilova and even though they're lagging behind in the singles' major count, their legend will go on unlike others who took over the mantle of GOAT! Sampras is barely a footnote when we were making commiserate comments trying to make him TOP GUY All Time even without a FO final! Standards change and even with Fedal well ahead, Nole was closing fast and just on the cusp of "owning it!" There's been a hiccup, but the future looks brighter for him! Now Fedal will fight it out to the end and I have to believe Nole and the "Next Gen" will rise up and help secure Federer supremacy though tenuous with 2 players that literally own him! Right now I'm no fan of either, but I'd rather have Federer's style, class, & persona to be the face of "TENNIS!" :whistle:

 

[Horsa]

The context here is that many of us are just plain p*&%$#d off with Nadal's draw and for whatever reason he has been lucky with his draws Or, to be more generous, maybe we Roger fans notice it only when Nadal's draw is sweet. To watch Roger's legacy get eclipsed, and yes it is inexorably and definitively being eclipsed by Nadal right before our eyes, is certainly a tough pill to swallow. Any Roger fan who ruminates about how much more Roger might have accomplished will soon be relegated to the would've-should've-and-bitter camp.

Some, like Monfed may be inconsolable and more bitter. I'd say it is not entirely an overreaction to find it gutting to watch a 15 year emotional investment take a blow with finality.

I can understand that & appreciate you telling me how some people think in a sensible & civilised manner. I always try to consider everyone's thoughts, feelings & opinions. Thank you very much. I just found that some of the comments made were ridiculous & rude & disagree with Monfed's name-calling. You've admitted that it might not be the case that Nadal has luckier draws than Federer but that you remember more of Nadal's luckier draws. Everyone has selective memory sometimes. I admire your honesty. Thank you very much.

I can understand how you must be feeling but disagree that people aren't over-reacting even if it's just a little bit. I know you're big tennis fans but the world doesn't revolve around tennis. There are other more important things in life though I respect your opinions & rights to have & air them. I just disagree with some of the ridiculous statements that he comes up with (as though the world revolves around tennis sometimes but there are more important things in the world even to the most ardent fans) & the name-calling & he appears to be influencing other people to behave the same way.

 

[Horsa]

Like I said before I really don't complain when someone gets a tough draw. Clearly to everyone not named Carol, Fed's draw looks pretty tough. I will, however, call a cake draw for what it is.

And with Nadal it has become a very regular occurrence in New York and that's really frustrating. It happens, I really thought Roger had an extreme cakewalk draw at RG in 2013 and 2015 and simply didn't take advantage, but with Nadal it's getting beyond frustrating at USO.

Also, Rafa still has work to do to eclipse Roger, but it looks likely especially if Fed remains the lame duck he's been since IW. He needs to wake up and realize his legacy is under attack. Screw his family life and everything else, this should be more important.

I understand how you must be feeling & think that any good fan would feel the same way. I respect your opinion & right to have & air 1 & appreciate the fact that you're being respectful of other people's rights to do the same.

I agree. If someone has a job they should do it to the best of their ability or quit. Playing tennis is his job so he should do his best or quit.

 

[El Dude]

Comparing the draws. Here are the best players by round that Rafa, Roger, and Novak could face:

RAFA: Ferrer - Pospisil - Khachanov (or Muller) - Edmund - Anderson (or Thiem) - del Potro (or Stan) - Novak (or Roger)
NOVAK: Fucsovics - Sandgren - Gasquet - Carreno Busta - Roger - Zverev (or Cilic) - Rafa
ROGER: Nishioka - Paire - Kyrgios - Fognini (or Chung) - Novak - Zverev (or CIlic) - Rafa

Let's go round by round.

R1: Ferrer is old and declining, but who knows, maybe he'll be inspired to play Rafa. Nishioka had that one good tournamenta awhile back but really shouldn't challenge Roger. At all. Fucsovics is a bit trick and has improved greatly this year and probably presents the most difficult challenge.

R2: I think we've got a threeway tie. All can play at times but all are erratic and should be relatively easy to defeat.

R3: Khachanov is a good rising player but is 0-4 vs Rafa and has yet to win a set. No probem. If Muller gets in, that could be intriguing - but this isn't Wimbledon, so no worries for Rafa fans. Gasquet? Ha! Kyrgios is obviously a threat, but it depends on his health. But clearly Roger has the hardest opponent.

R4: Carreno Busta is sneakily good but Novak shouldn't have a problem. If this were clay I'd worry about Fog (or Chung), but not on hards. Edmund presents the most difficult opponent of the three, at least for Rafa, who took three sets to beat him at Monte Carlo. Could be interesting.

QF: Roger has the worst opponent, then Novak. Obviously they are far more concerning than Anderson for Rafa, who he beat quite easily last year.

SF: I'm going to call this a wash as del Potro, Wawrinka, Zverev and Cilic can all be similarly dangerous, depending upon the day. Delpo is a serious darkhorse to win this, but Zverev is due and we know what Cilic can do when in form. Stan is almost back but not entirely.

F: A wash.

All things tolled, it is much closer than some are saying and I don't see a huge conspiracy at work. The main difference is the quarterfinal, but that's just the luck of the draw and it was 50-50 and Rafa got lucky. But I think the other six rounds are close enough not to see a huge difference. Rafa does have the easiest draw because of the QF, and Roger probably has it slightly worse than Novak, but the gap isn't so large that an in-form Roger shouldn't be able to overcome it.

 

[Moxie]

One thing for all to keep in mind about draws is we sometimes talk about 2 different things. One is the initial draw, which could look tougher. Another is how the draw plays out. So sure, if a potential speed bump for either Roger, Rafa or Novak, say, gets knocked out early, it smooths the path, but it doesn't change what the draw ever was. I think some people are remembering draws that opened up. Nadal's 2010 and 2013 draws had dangerous players, but they didn't make it to him. And he still won both beating Djokovic. Last year, it bears remembering, the top half of the draw was by far the tougher, especially when Murray dropped out of the bottom half. We all know that it was Nadal's or Federer's to win, given how many top players were absent. I've said that one was a gift. (Also, he was absent 2014, and I have no memory of the 2015 one, specific to Fedal.) This year, I fully agree that his is easier than Roger's. That's just fair to say. But El Dude made a good analysis above that it's not that lop-sided.

 

[Moxie]

Oh relax, it is kind of a joke. The world is an OK place even with Nadal's tennis achievements included. But the sooner he's gone the better the game will be, especially if he is/was what I think.

So that sort makes it a joke, and then almost completely walks it back. B-)

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The context here is that many of us are just plain p*&%$#d off with Nadal's draw and for whatever reason he has been lucky with his draws Or, to be more generous, maybe we Roger fans notice it only when Nadal's draw is sweet. To watch Roger's legacy get eclipsed, and yes it is inexorably and definitively being eclipsed by Nadal right before our eyes, is certainly a tough pill to swallow. Any Roger fan who ruminates about how much more Roger might have accomplished will soon be relegated to the would've-should've-and-bitter camp.

Some, like Monfed may be inconsolable and more bitter. I'd say it is not entirely an overreaction to find it gutting to watch a 15 year emotional investment take a blow with finality.

Records are meant to be broken. I don't mind even if every single record of Roger is broken. However, I don't want any significant record (forget about "oldest to do x" record and longevity records) of Roger be broken by any of his contemporaries. His records should be broken only by someone who becomes a Pro after Roger hangs up his racquet.

p.s. Relax lob, you are acting as though Rafa has already eclipsed Roger. I am sure there will be lot more twists and turns in this saga.

 

[DarthFed]

So that sort makes it a joke, and then almost completely walks it back. B-)

The world is bigger than tennis. Rafa being #1 would just ruin the sport.

 

[Moxie]

The world is bigger than tennis. Rafa being #1 would just ruin the sport.

That's because you have a really prejudiced POV. Yes, in fact, the world is bigger than tennis. Humanity doesn't need to be saved from Nadal. I would say, however, that this tennis forum needs to be saved from those of you who make cheap allegations against Nadal. At every turn. You have your hard-headed beliefs. And you and Front admit that you can't back them up. It would be nice if you'd give it a rest. Everyone knows what you and Front think. And they know it's just your theory. There is a reason that folks don't jump in, and it's not just because the topic is contentious. It's because they are not convinced. Even GSM said that a lot of my points made sense, on the doping thread, and GSM can't stand me. So can u stop now?

I'd also like to see this forum saved from unrelenting claims about how humanity or even the sport is in danger. It's just effing tennis, and some folks need to get over themselves, as more than a few posters have stated. Here I'm looking at monfed.

 

[Carol]

The world is bigger than tennis. Rafa being #1 would just ruin the sport.

I'd say if Federer would be #1 at his 37 would ruin the sport completely

 

[Carol]

I'm watching through the TC Wimbledon final 2008 and I can't believe how Rafa winning 2-1 and having the service and the match in his hands he could make some awful mistakes given still some hope to Federer though we all know what happened later.....

 

[DarthFed]

I'm watching through the TC Wimbledon final 2008 and I can't believe how Rafa winning 2-1 and having the service and the match in his hands he could make some awful mistakes given still some hope to Federer though we all know what happened later.....

Yeah but Federer was so brilliant that match I thought?? At least that's what all the Rafa homers have said. If only he'd have played as great as Rosol, Darcis, Brown, Kyrgios or Muller he'd have won.

 

[DarthFed]

That's because you have a really prejudiced POV. Yes, in fact, the world is bigger than tennis. Humanity doesn't need to be saved from Nadal. I would say, however, that this tennis forum needs to be saved from those of you who make cheap allegations against Nadal. At every turn. You have your hard-headed beliefs. And you and Front admit that you can't back them up. It would be nice if you'd give it a rest. Everyone knows what you and Front think. And they know it's just your theory. There is a reason that folks don't jump in, and it's not just because the topic is contentious. It's because they are not convinced. Even GSM said that a lot of my points made sense, on the doping thread, and GSM can't stand me. So can u stop now?

I'd also like to see this forum saved from unrelenting claims about how humanity or even the sport is in danger. It's just effing tennis, and some folks need to get over themselves, as more than a few posters have stated. Here I'm looking at monfed.

I've mostly kept the PED talk to that thread, you're the one bringing it up often on unrelated threads. Also my discussion this time around hasn't even revolved around Nadal but rather all athletes' general motivation to take something that will make them much better than they otherwise are. You think most promising young athletes have ZERO motivation to take them. I strongly disagree.

 

[Carol]

Yeah but Federer was so brilliant that match I thought?? At least that's what all the Rafa homers have said. If only he'd have played as great as Rosol, Darcis, Brown, Kyrgios or Muller he'd have won.

Same like if Federer would have played as great as Stakhovsky, Anderson, Coric or Zverev he’d have won and of course in his best surface