2015 French Open Semifinal: Djokovic v. Murray

[crystalfire]

i say djokovic in 4. he seems like a man on a mission
in other news... WTF TAMPA. BLEW THE LEAD. sorry i hate the blackhawks. not sure if anyone else watches hockey here lol

 

[brokenshoelace]

I actually feel really better reading Bodo's obituary for Nadal. This pretty much guarantees a resurgence.

 

[Kirijax]

i say djokovic in 4. he seems like a man on a mission
in other news... WTF TAMPA. BLEW THE LEAD. sorry i hate the blackhawks. not sure if anyone else watches hockey here lol

Hockey? You mean that sport where they skate around on a frozen rink, chase around something that is not visible to the naked eye, knock each other's teeth out, have timeout boxes for adults, and have a trophy that Def Lepard displayed upside down?

Yes, I know it well.

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npwMdSWSeZI[/video]

 

[Moxie]

I'm glad you've gotten over pretending that Novak was actually that close before, and has been Rafa's 'whipping boy' at RG. But as I said to Britbox on the other thread who tried to proclaim the same thing: The King of Clay is not dead. Rafa will long be the King of Clay. Remember how long Borg was. And Novak is not the King of Clay by any stretch by beating this version of Nadal. Get a grip, man! It was a QF.

This from someone who touted over and over and over the fact that Novak had never beaten Rafa on clay. It was only a quarterfinal? Beating "this" version of Nadal?

Headlines read:

from SI: "Djokovic clobbers 'King' Nadal, to face Murray"

Garber: "Djokovic's win over Nadal simply stunning"

Or this from Bodo: "He said what? Rafael Nadal doesn't see decline"

Here's a good quote from the article:

"Add those words to all the other puzzling, often unconvincing ones that this towering but clearly troubled champion has uttered over the course of the past six months. It might seem unkind to pile on at a time when this latest wound is still so fresh, but this is an unusual moment, for Nadal appears to be in a downward spiral, the nature of which he doesn't recognize."

Obviously neither do you or some of his other fans.

http://espn.go.com/tennis/french15/story/_/id/13006227/french-open-rafael-nadal-see-decline

That post was in response to Fiero, who changes his tune faster than the weather changes in Ireland.

When would I have been touting that Nole hadn't beaten Rafa on clay? If I did, it wouldn't have been since 2010, and 2 forums ago. Fine, if that makes you happy to use it as an excuse to post glowing headlines, but don't take after me. My point to Fiero, and britbox earlier, was that the King of Clay is not dead. Rafa will long be the King of Clay until someone surpasses his records, which will take some time.

Bobvance said earlier that it felt anti-climactic, because it was. A quarterfinal (you wonder)?? Well...it was, and it wasn't a good version of Nadal, though of course it was a spectacular version of Djokovic. That's just a feature of career timing. The brash young Serb declared Nadal "beatable" in 2006 when they first played here. He had five other chances to prove that, at various iterations of both of their levels, including 3 since Djokovic has reached his best and still he couldn't do it. Nadal has been far less than spectacular all of this year, and so, unsurprisingly, Djoker finally nipped him at the French. (Not sure why Garber is "stunned.") Playing fantastically well, for sure. But it is fair to say that Novak couldn't do it until he got a very reduced Nadal. A new King of Clay is not declared because Djokovic did what was expected and beat Rafa today. That's all I'm saying.

And the rest is just you being opportunistically gloaty, as I said above, granny. :laydownlaughing

Back to Murray v. Djokovic....

 

[nehmeth]

When would I have been touting that Nole hadn't beaten Rafa on clay? Rafa will long be the King of Clay until someone surpasses his records, which will take some time.

Bobvance said earlier that it felt anti-climactic, because it was. A quarterfinal (you wonder)?? Well...it was, and it wasn't a good version of Nadal, though of course it was a spectacular version of Djokovic.

Back to Murray v. Djokovic....

Coming into this RG, it was noted in various posts, not just by you, that Novak had never won against Rafa here. I agree with you that the match was between a diminished Nadal and a Djokovic who was executing his game. While Rafa is all time, the best that ever played on clay, he is no longer the present reigning king.

I would say the battle for that title will be played out between Murray and Djokovic. Those two have been the very best on clay. Both of them are undefeated on dirt this year. In the past I've stated that watching them was like watching Pong. While there will be a lot of excellent defense, methinks both men will come out playing very aggressively.

Both of these guys know this is their window to shine and that the other is the biggest obstacle they will be facing over the next year or so.

 

[Kieran]

When would I have been touting that Nole hadn't beaten Rafa on clay? Rafa will long be the King of Clay until someone surpasses his records, which will take some time.

Bobvance said earlier that it felt anti-climactic, because it was. A quarterfinal (you wonder)?? Well...it was, and it wasn't a good version of Nadal, though of course it was a spectacular version of Djokovic.

Back to Murray v. Djokovic....

Coming into this RG, it was noted in various posts, not just by you, that Novak had never won against Rafa here. I agree with you that the match was between a diminished Nadal and a Djokovic who was executing his game. While Rafa is all time, the best that ever played on clay, he is no longer the present reigning king.

I would say the battle for that title will be played out between Murray and Djokovic. Those two have been the very best on clay. Both of them are undefeated on dirt this year. In the past I've stated that watching them was like watching Pong. While there will be a lot of excellent defense, methinks both men will come out playing very aggressively.

Both of these guys know this is their window to shine and that the other is the biggest obstacle they will be facing over the next year or so.

The King of Clay will always be Rafa, he was still the KOC in 2009 after Federer won RG, but that's a good point about this years match between Andy and Novak. Both unbeaten. And the beauty of the final four is, there's two potentially good spoilers in the other half too. So the favourites face-off in one match, but Stan or even Tsonga - swept along on a blue tide of passion and crowd argy bargy - could be decent spoilsports in a good final...

 

[brokenshoelace]

I never liked the "he's never beaten X" argument when every other factor is in a player's favor. In other words, it's one thing to say for example, "Wawrinka's never beaten Nadal" before the AO final last year. But when one player is playing much better tennis than the other, is a much better player at the moment, and has beaten another player before, just not at a particular tournament, then saying "he's never beaten player X at tournament Y" becomes an extremely selective parameter.

For instance, I think Novak would have beaten Nadal at RG in 2011. Yes, he'd never done it (and lost to him 3 more times after that), but that year, there were too many factors in Novak's favor.

 

[nehmeth]

When would I have been touting that Nole hadn't beaten Rafa on clay? Rafa will long be the King of Clay until someone surpasses his records, which will take some time.

Bobvance said earlier that it felt anti-climactic, because it was. A quarterfinal (you wonder)?? Well...it was, and it wasn't a good version of Nadal, though of course it was a spectacular version of Djokovic.

Back to Murray v. Djokovic....

Coming into this RG, it was noted in various posts, not just by you, that Novak had never won against Rafa here. I agree with you that the match was between a diminished Nadal and a Djokovic who was executing his game. While Rafa is all time, the best that ever played on clay, he is no longer the present reigning king.

I would say the battle for that title will be played out between Murray and Djokovic. Those two have been the very best on clay. Both of them are undefeated on dirt this year. In the past I've stated that watching them was like watching Pong. While there will be a lot of excellent defense, methinks both men will come out playing very aggressively.

Both of these guys know this is their window to shine and that the other is the biggest obstacle they will be facing over the next year or so.

The King of Clay will always be Rafa, he was still the KOC in 2009 after Federer won RG, but that's a good point about this years match between Andy and Novak. Both unbeaten. And the beauty of the final four is, there's two potentially good spoilers in the other half too. So the favourites face-off in one match, but Stan or even Tsonga - swept along on a blue tide of passion and crowd argy bargy - could be decent spoilsports in a good final...

Well, you still believe that Nadal will be back to a certain level of mastery at some point in the future. Fact is that while he is the best that ever played, he wasn't upset by an aggressive 2nd tier player this time. He is no longer the present reigning king.

You are quite right, those two lads in the other half could both mix it up with either Murray or Djoker. Right now though, whoever wins this one continues the unbeaten streak on the dirt.

 

[Kieran]

Well, you still believe that Nadal will be back to a certain level of mastery at some point in the future. Fact is that while he is the best that ever played, he wasn't upset by an aggressive 2nd tier player this time. He is no longer the present reigning king.

This is true, but although he won't be back to 2010 levels again, he could still win in RG again. We'll call whoever wins it this year a steward, if any other title except "champ" is needed.

You are quite right, those two lads in the other half could both mix it up with either Murray or Djoker. Right now though, whoever wins this one continues the unbeaten streak on the dirt.

That's what makes this year more than just a blip. They both handled Rafa with ease and they're confident, superior and on their game. I'm looking forward to this one, despite what people say about their matches. Yeah, they can be heavy and mirror-image on court, but it's still a huge match, and they're always worth watching...

 

[nehmeth]

^^^^
"regent" a person who exercises the ruling power in a kingdom during the minority, absence, or disability of the sovereign.

 

[Kieran]

^^^^
"regent" a person who exercises the ruling power in a kingdom during the minority, absence, or disability of the sovereign.

Regent Tsonga has a ring about it... :snicker

 

[britbox]

The person who wins the title is the reigning King of Roland Garros. It doesn't change past exploits, but we're living in the present. Nadal will be always be the "King of Clay" in terms of exploits but he won't be the King of Roland Garros this year.. and possibly never again.

There is no regent or steward... only a deserving champion in their own right. This might be hard to swallow for a few people in denial but that's how it rolls.

 

[Kieran]

The person who wins the title is the reigning King of Roland Garros. It doesn't change past exploits, but we're living in the present. Nadal will be always be the "King of Clay" in terms of exploits but he won't be the King of Roland Garros this year.. and possibly never again.

There is no regent or steward... only a deserving champion in their own right. This might be hard to swallow for a few people in denial but that's how it rolls.

Nobody is in denial, brother. The title we're talking about isn't "King of Roland Garros". There's no such title. There's the champion of Roland Garros, and there are four men contending for it, two of them clearly the best on clay this year, and one of them two is clearly the favourite to win it...

 

[Riotbeard]

^^^^
"regent" a person who exercises the ruling power in a kingdom during the minority, absence, or disability of the sovereign.

Regent Tsonga has a ring about it... :snicker

Well, I won't say having Kieran back is the best thing about nadal losing, it is a win-win.

 

[Kieran]

I know it's a random comment, but does anybody else think the Roland Garros website is a disappointment this year? It seems unnecessarily unwieldy, and any time I click the live scoreboard it loads partly, displaying stats but with the actual score concealed... :cover

 

[britbox]

^ Yeah, it's utter crap. They've gone with this scrolling Parallax effect, which is the rage to some... but a pain in the arse to others just looking for info as swiftly as possible in a conventional manner.

 

[Kieran]

^ Yeah, it's utter crap. They've gone with this scrolling Parallax effect, which is the rage to some... but a pain in the arse to others just looking for info as swiftly as possible in a conventional manner.

Exactly! I'm glad it's not just me. It used to be so much easier to navigate. Been looking for transcripts of the interviews - they used to be clearly in the tab marked "news" - but I gave up looking. Used to be good articles there too, but the News section looks cheap and shabby. I rarely consult the site anymore...

 

[Moxie]

The person who wins the title is the reigning King of Roland Garros. It doesn't change past exploits, but we're living in the present. Nadal will be always be the "King of Clay" in terms of exploits but he won't be the King of Roland Garros this year.. and possibly never again.

There is no regent or steward... only a deserving champion in their own right. This might be hard to swallow for a few people in denial but that's how it rolls.

Nobody is in denial, brother. The title we're talking about isn't "King of Roland Garros". There's no such title. There's the champion of Roland Garros, and there are four men contending for it, two of them clearly the best on clay this year, and one of them two is clearly the favourite to win it...

That's what I was talking about. And at least BB admits it now, too. Folks were getting way ahead of themselves with both "The King is Dead," and "Long live the king," because the win yesterday didn't crown anything. Nadal is the King of Clay, which doesn't get thrown around randomly every year.

And I agree, I can't use the RG website. Actually, if you launch the live scores from the ATP website, it looks like it goes to the RG one, but the functionality is different and better. For what it's worth now.

 

[britbox]

The person who wins the title is the reigning King of Roland Garros. It doesn't change past exploits, but we're living in the present. Nadal will be always be the "King of Clay" in terms of exploits but he won't be the King of Roland Garros this year.. and possibly never again.

There is no regent or steward... only a deserving champion in their own right. This might be hard to swallow for a few people in denial but that's how it rolls.

Nobody is in denial, brother. The title we're talking about isn't "King of Roland Garros". There's no such title. There's the champion of Roland Garros, and there are four men contending for it, two of them clearly the best on clay this year, and one of them two is clearly the favourite to win it...

That's what I was talking about. And at least BB admits it now, too. Folks were getting way ahead of themselves with both "The King is Dead," and "Long live the king," because the win yesterday didn't crown anything. Nadal is the King of Clay, which doesn't get thrown around randomly every year.

And I agree, I can't use the RG website. Actually, if you launch the live scores from the ATP website, it looks like it goes to the RG one, but the functionality is different and better. For what it's worth now.

Never didn't "admit it"... it's a figure of speech when an era comes to an end and a new regime takes hold. Look it up.

Only an idiot would dismiss Nadal's past exploits on clay, or revisit nicknames based on what a player did in the past compared to the present.

People can call Sampras, the "King of grass"... and they wouldn't be wrong... but is he the King of Grass right now?

The win yesterday didn't crown a thing. But a win on Sunday will.. for whoever wins the title (and it's not god given that will be Djokovic - although he is obviously the favourite)... and that title and crown will be earned and deserved.

 

[Kieran]

There's been two players rightly called King of Clay, which is both a fun and an earned title: Borg and Nadal.

Why? Because they dominated their peers and ruled the roost in Paris for a record number of years.

If we want to go there, it was silly when muster was called it, and nobody called Roger it in 2009.

King of grass? A few of them, including Pete in the 90's and Roger now. Nobody is calling Novak King of Grass. Like I say, these things are fun, but they're also earned. They signify exceptional domination.

Whoever wins RG this year will be as deserving a champ as anyone else who won it. There's nobody begrudges this. Nadal isn't the best on clay this year - he can't even beat FFS in two attempts - so there's many better players than him this season, with Nole as the best of these, so far...