2019 Men’s Wimbledon SF: Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal

[calitennis127]

I feel so emasculated because a keyboard warrior put me in my place.... or not...

Mate... stop with more right than anyone nonsense. There are some folks on here who could get away with BS like that. You're not one of them...

Oh really.....lol. Name one poster who was more right than I was about age. I repeatedly said for years that all of this talk about Federer and the others getting old was nonsense.

I have been proven totally right. What other poster was more right about that?

 

[DarthFed]

That's nonsense.....it's your standard tactic to say that Federer was horrible every time he loses.

Actually no, it's not a tactic. That's just more BS from you and Mikey. Djokovic was not at a high level for a lot of the match. Overall his serve and ROS were well below par and he had a lot more misses than we are accustomed to seeing. He basically went away for 1.5 sets FFS, he was shockingly bad. If Roger didn't go full blown pussy/blonde in every pressure moment we'd have posts today wondering what is wrong with Djokovic, is he done? etc.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

but this is what a bad match up problem does. Same thing with the AO final this year. It's not that Rafa suddenly became rubbish, he wasn't allowed to play the game that was so effective in prior matches....

I see your point about different match ups,though Rafa used to run around his bhand all the time,if you have noticed he has not being doing that of late,my main concern he was tentative,his game plan went out the window,he had his chances in that s/final at Wimbledon,that match at the AO was a complete beatdown.

 

[Federberg]

I see your point about different match ups,though Rafa used to run around his bhand all the time,if you have noticed he has not being doing that of late,my main concern he was tentative,his game plan went out the window,he had his chances in that s/final at Wimbledon,that match at the AO was a complete beatdown.

yes for sure. Roger might be renting a small room in Rafa's head, Novak is a major property owner. I would actually argue that Rafa's loss to Novak in Australia was so bad that it's forever altered my perception of his mental toughness. He's tough, no question about it, but he once and finally proved to me he's as frail as the next guy when inflicted with a seemingly insurmountable mental problem. In summary... he's human after all

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

yes for sure. Roger might be renting a small room in Rafa's head, Novak is a major property owner. I would actually argue that Rafa's loss to Novak in Australia was so bad that it's forever altered my perception of his mental toughness. He's tough, no question about it, but he once and finally proved to me he's as frail as the next guy when inflicted with a seemingly insurmountable mental problem. In summary... he's human after all

I dont think Novak is such a major property owner on clay against Rafa,though at the AO Novak has made that his own backyard.

 

[Federberg]

I dont think Novak is such a major property owner on clay against Rafa,though at the AO Novak has made that his own backyard.

he certainly isn't on clay I agree. But he presents doubts to Rafa even on that surface. So I'm sure it feels, to Rafa, as if there's nowhere safe to face him

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

he certainly isn't on clay I agree. But he presents doubts to Rafa even on that surface. So I'm sure it feels, to Rafa, as if there's nowhere safe to face him

Rafa is aware of Novak strengths,though on clay,especially at RG,Rafa is a different specimen I have been to many finals there,even when Rafa has not been playing well,in lead up tournaments,like earlier this clay season,when he arrives at RG he seems to come into his own.

 

[calitennis127]

Actually no, it's not a tactic. That's just more BS from you and Mikey. Djokovic was not at a high level for a lot of the match.

Maybe you should give Federer credit for outstanding serving and playing very well overall.

Overall his serve and ROS were well below par

Why was Djokovic's serve "below par"? He served the same he always does.

And his return game wasn't clicking because Federer's serving was outstanding most of the time.

and he had a lot more misses than we are accustomed to seeing. He basically went away for 1.5 sets FFS, he was shockingly bad.

Or maybe grasscourt tennis is more effortless for Federer than it is for Djokovic. Ever thought of that? Also, I think you terribly misinterpret the second set.

If Roger didn't go full blown pussy/blonde in every pressure moment we'd have posts today wondering what is wrong with Djokovic, is he done? etc.

The people saying that would just be talking hysterically, like you are right now.

 

[imjimmy]

By the way. Rafa please go get married dude, knock up your lovely bride to be and come back in a month to Cincy tournament with the attitude that someone is trying to take food from you new family's table. Then you can win 3 more non clay grand slams titles.

Marriage won't do anything. It's just a signed paper - they are probably already living together or close to it. Nothing substantial will change even in his personal life.

What Nadal needs is changes to his tennis. He's fine mentally. Djokovic and Federer have improved and Nadal hasn't at the same rate. It's as simple as that.

Look at Fed's backhand. He's never hit it better even in his prime and it's dominated Nadal and even Djokovic to an extent. Djokovic's serve is bigger and better than it's ever been. His net play has improved and so has his forehand.

These guys hired new coaches, data analytics gurus, changed equipment and adopted new strategies. In Nadal's case, it took him forever to change to Moya, and even Moya hasn't done anything innovative. Djokovic hired top players (Becker, Goran etc) as coaches, Fed hired Ljubicic and Nadal hasn't done anything similar except hiring someone who can speak his language. Not a world class player or coach. Fed switched to a bigger racquet frame, Novak changed the weight of his racquet and companies as well. Nadal didn't do anything and lacks power sometimes.

Furthermore: Nadal used to serve well in 2010 and even in 2013. But that serve is AWOL. His serve continues to be a liability. He continues to persist in returning waaay far from the baseline even on grass. I've never seen him return as badly (in 15 yrs) as he did against Fed in the Wimb SF. So with a (relatively) weak serve and a relatively (weak) ROS - he starts every point at a disadvantage. He has to rely on his ground game to somehow get to neutral, but even that starts to fail under pressure - as his backhand spectacularly did against Fed in the SF.

So no coincidence he is 0-17 (or something similar) vs Novak and Fed outside of clay in the past several years. Rafa won't win more non-clay slams unless he makes some big changes. Hoping for luck of the draw or for these guys to slip out of form - is not a strategy..

 

[Fiero425]

This continues to be so ridiculous with Fedalovic still owning the tour! I find it hilarious and frustrating to see another "next gen" crop underachieve; not one making the 2nd week of Wimbledon! You can't upset the elites if you can't get out of the early rounds! I still say many of these people are playing too much! It's not the count, but how hard it is to compete with the ball traveling over 100 MPH in relentlessly long rallies! It was shocking to see Roger and Nole whacking away in the 1st game of their final like that! It was high quality stuff, but not so entertaining that it turned into a clay match where both refused to miss! I'm more entertained by Doc IVO at the HOF tourney this week with some bad bounces and quick points! The long rallies coming from slow measured strokes instead of trying to take the cover off the ball! :whistle:

 

[brokenshoelace]

Go ahead, tell me where I was wrong. Before Nadal won majors off clay, I said that he could (back in the days when everyone wondered if his "brutal" playing style would "translate" to other surfaces). Once he won off of clay and exposed Federer's weaknesses (which no one talked about while Federer was dominating the tour), I then proceeded to point out some of Nadal's flaws.

When were you wrong about Nadal? That's too ridiculous to evben answer.

It never should have gotten to a 5th. That was a big win for Djokovic in turning his 2018 season around but I don't think he played the greatest.

Wait, it never should have gone to a fifth? Wasn't Nadal the one who had set points in the third set tie break to go 2 sets to 1 up but blew it, before breaking Djokovic early in the fourth and taking the set? So how shouldn't it have gone to five?

But you have spoken as though it was always impossible for Federer to beat Nadal on clay based on the "match-up," no matter how many close matches they played and no matter how many clearly correctable errors Federer made. There were clearly stretches in their clay-court matches which showed Federer had the game to beat Nadal on clay. Nadal did not win every match they played 6-2, 6-2 as you and others tried to make it sound.

How has Federer fared vs. Nadal on clay since?

Oh, excuse me, was it actually 40-15? Thank you for the pettiest fact check possible. The point remains the same.

Oh excuse me person on the internet who's to inept to fact check, Federer wasn't up 40-15. He never had set points on serve to begin with. At 5-2, with Nadal serving, he had a set point, and hit a drop shot just wide. Nadal proceeded to hold serve to make it 5-3, and then broke Federer the next game without Roger ever having set points on serve. So yeah, you literally are making shit up...AGAIN.

 

[DarthFed]

Maybe you should give Federer credit for outstanding serving and playing very well overall.



Why was Djokovic's serve "below par"? He served the same he always does.

And his return game wasn't clicking because Federer's serving was outstanding most of the time.



Or maybe grasscourt tennis is more effortless for Federer than it is for Djokovic. Ever thought of that? Also, I think you terribly misinterpret the second set.



The people saying that would just be talking hysterically, like you are right now.

Roger played well when it barely mattered and he didn't really serve well at all. 63% on grass including awful serving in big moments (TB's and the game he served for it). Nah, Djokovic was returning way way worse than normal and his serve was also pretty bad for extended periods.

Anyways in sports if you are trash during the 5-10% most important part and great the rest of the time, did you really play that well to begin with? I say no, but it seems a lot of people, even reasonable posters say yes. I will stick to my guns. The rest of the stats don't matter, Roger was simply worthless when push came to shove.

 

[Moxie]

Well he did thrash him on the scoreboard, beating him in straight sets. But if you watch the match closely, it was closer than the score would indicate - just as Nadal's 6-1 record against Djokovic at the French is misleading. I see that series as closer in terms of playing level than 6-1 would normally indicate.

Can we all agree that Nadal being 6-1 against Djokovic at the French is a little bit different than him being 6-1 against Mardy Fish or Sam Querrey?

I don't think Djokovic is a perfect player.....far from it. I think Mike downplays some of his shortcomings. But clearly Djokovic has underachieved at the French Open in his career. It has been by far his weakest Slam, although his US Opens have not been the greatest either.

This is a load of back-peddling from you, when faced with your own words. Either it was a thrashing, or it wasn't. As I said, you change your coloration of events to suit whatever is your current agenda. It 2015, you were pushing that Nadal's drop in form was really his actual level, because you hate him so much. Now, he got whooped by Novak in 2015, to insist that Novak could. You still ignore Rafa's level in 2015.

Now, there is a clear reason that Novak has "under-performed" at RG. It's the same one for why Roger has: Rafa is as close to unbeatable there as unbeatable gets. Sure I'll agree that a 6-1 record there over Djokovic is different than a 6-1 anywhere over basically anyone anywhere, outside of Majors. Because Djokovic is an elite player. I don't know why you even bother saying something so pointless. (Oh, well, right....) However, you say that it doesn't tell the whole story. Um, no, it kinda does. Novak couldn't beat any version of Nadal at RG until he ran into the C- version. Unless you want to talk about why he didn't beat Stan in 2015, there is really no more Novak could have done to have more trophies at RG. As to USO, I do remember you trying to alternate universe the 2013 final, too, but you can't change it.

 

[Garro]

I watched the match from about halfway through the 4th set through to the end. From what I saw I thought it was incredibly high level. Certainly comparable to the finals in 08, 09, 14, among others.

I felt pretty bad for Roger after losing those match points, especially since he has lost other key matches against Djokovic after having match points, and since he apparently came close to winning every set that he lost.

But I would have felt bad for Novak too if he had lost to Roger when he is at this age in his career. To me this match was reminiscent of the 09' final in some ways: the winning player was returning serve much worse than usual for the whole match, but managed to play the big points much better.

 

[calitennis127]

This is a load of back-peddling from you, when faced with your own words. Either it was a thrashing, or it wasn't.

There is no contradiction there. It was a thrashing on paper (which is how Broken judges the Federer-Nadal match-up on clay), but what I said at the time was that the match was closer than the scoreline indicated. Why is that a contradiction? It's the exact same thing I have said about Federer-Nadal matches over the years.

As I said, you change your coloration of events to suit whatever is your current agenda. It 2015, you were pushing that Nadal's drop in form was really his actual level, because you hate him so much.

I don't hate him, I actually have a very high regard for him in numerous ways, such as footwork and assertive mindset. I just can't stand what a lot of his fans say and think, and I also get annoyed by aspects of his playing style and how he pulls out BS wins at times. I also maintain that I understand Nadal's success better than anyone.

My point about Nadal in 2015 was that his level wasn't as bad as many people were saying, and I was right about that. They were going all by wins and losses and nothing else.

Now, there is a clear reason that Novak has "under-performed" at RG. It's the same one for why Roger has: Rafa is as close to unbeatable there as unbeatable gets.

What did Djokovic's losses at the French in 2018 or 2019 have to do with Nadal?

Sure I'll agree that a 6-1 record there over Djokovic is different than a 6-1 anywhere over basically anyone anywhere, outside of Majors. Because Djokovic is an elite player. I don't know why you even bother saying something so pointless. (Oh, well, right....) However, you say that it doesn't tell the whole story.

The point is that many of Federer's losses and Djokovic's losses to Nadal on clay were far more winnable than you would like to admit.

Novak couldn't beat any version of Nadal at RG until he ran into the C- version.

Okay, DarthMoxie.

Unless you want to talk about why he didn't beat Stan in 2015, there is really no more Novak could have done to have more trophies at RG.

Yes there is.

As to USO, I do remember you trying to alternate universe the 2013 final, too, but you can't change it.

Now, if you want to talk choke, that was a great example: Djokovic in that third set.

 

[Moxie]

There is no contradiction there. It was a thrashing on paper (which is how Broken judges the Federer-Nadal match-up on clay), but what I said at the time was that the match was closer than the scoreline indicated. Why is that a contradiction? It's the exact same thing I have said about Federer-Nadal matches over the years.



I don't hate him, I actually have a very high regard for him in numerous ways, such as footwork and assertive mindset. I just can't stand what a lot of his fans say and think, and I also get annoyed by aspects of his playing style and how he pulls out BS wins at times. I also maintain that I understand Nadal's success better than anyone.

My point about Nadal in 2015 was that his level wasn't as bad as many people were saying, and I was right about that. They were going all by wins and losses and nothing else.



What did Djokovic's losses at the French in 2018 or 2019 have to do with Nadal?



The point is that many of Federer's losses and Djokovic's losses to Nadal on clay were far more winnable than you would like to admit.



Okay, DarthMoxie.



Yes there is.



Now, if you want to talk choke, that was a great example: Djokovic in that third set.

Funny to see your random replies laid out like that, huh? You are incredibly tedious, contradictory and so random about what you hate, but sometimes fun, if just for the sport of showing what a wanker you are. I knew you'd go for the 2013 USO.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Marriage won't do anything. It's just a signed paper - they are probably already living together or close to it. Nothing substantial will change even in his personal life.

What Nadal needs is changes to his tennis. He's fine mentally. Djokovic and Federer have improved and Nadal hasn't at the same rate. It's as simple as that.

Look at Fed's backhand. He's never hit it better even in his prime and it's dominated Nadal and even Djokovic to an extent. Djokovic's serve is bigger and better than it's ever been. His net play has improved and so has his forehand.

These guys hired new coaches, data analytics gurus, changed equipment and adopted new strategies. In Nadal's case, it took him forever to change to Moya, and even Moya hasn't done anything innovative. Djokovic hired top players (Becker, Goran etc) as coaches, Fed hired Ljubicic and Nadal hasn't done anything similar except hiring someone who can speak his language. Not a world class player or coach. Fed switched to a bigger racquet frame, Novak changed the weight of his racquet and companies as well. Nadal didn't do anything and lacks power sometimes.

Furthermore: Nadal used to serve well in 2010 and even in 2013. But that serve is AWOL. His serve continues to be a liability. He continues to persist in returning waaay far from the baseline even on grass. I've never seen him return as badly (in 15 yrs) as he did against Fed in the Wimb SF. So with a (relatively) weak serve and a relatively (weak) ROS - he starts every point at a disadvantage. He has to rely on his ground game to somehow get to neutral, but even that starts to fail under pressure - as his backhand spectacularly did against Fed in the SF.

So no coincidence he is 0-17 (or something similar) vs Novak and Fed outside of clay in the past several years. Rafa won't win more non-clay slams unless he makes some big changes. Hoping for luck of the draw or for these guys to slip out of form - is not a strategy..

Fantastic post..thanks ImJimmy...one thing that's still baffles me..the CC BH..why did he loose confidence vs his match with Roger..Chris Fowler's comments were, leading into the semi, Rafa was hitting it better than ever..As you know I always felt it was the secret weapon that could provide separation from Roger's and Novak's FH..How could he loose confidence and play so passively .. although Roger still totally outplayed him in every aspect of the game..heck Roger totally outplayed Novak except the tiebreakers.

 

[the AntiPusher]

The world's biggest cornball has re-entered the ring, let's give him a round of applause. Hello Broken Two-Face, you are BACK big guy, BACK. The same guy who aggressively chastised me in 2010 for pointing out the obvious, which is that Djokovic has more talent for the grass than Nadal.

9 years later, who was right? I was. Djokovic has 5 Wimbledons to Nadal's 2. They are in different leagues.

Nadal has not absolutely "owned" Djokovic at Roland Garros. Their level has been very comparable. Djokovic was the better player for long stretches in both 2013 and 2014, and of course he thrashed him in 2015.

Djokovic has weaknesses that have cost him a number of big matches, including the 2014 French final.

He very reasonably could have win those 2013 and 2014 matches but you won't acknowledge that because you want to believe that Nadal is absolutely invincible at the French Open. But you are the same person who said that Federer did not choke at all in the 2011 final when he was up 5-2, 40-0 in the first. So I shouldn't be surprised.

I will agree with you especially if your assessment of BS.. The most pure overrated legend in his/her own mind..I think I would prefer a box of exlax than to suffer reading BS comments..Even #45 have more humility than that poster..well.thats not true.. they're are each other's Doppleganer

 

[calitennis127]

Funny to see your random replies laid out like that, huh? You are incredibly tedious, contradictory and so random about what you hate, but sometimes fun, if just for the sport of showing what a wanker you are. I knew you'd go for the 2013 USO.

Moxie what contradiction have you pointed out at any time in our conversations? You are only saying that because of my "thrashing" remark about Djokovic versus Nadal at the 2015 French Open, but I clearly explained that there is a difference between the scoreboard total and how the match was played. In terms of the scoreboard, it was a thrashing. If you look at the match itself, it was not as lopsided as many would have you believe. The same goes for many of Nadal's victories on clay over Federer and Djokovic.

But besides that, you have never pointed to a single contradiction in anything I have said. The one thing that separates you and I more than anything is that I am very attentive to detail, while you speak in vague generalities that make you feel comfy. When someone is attentive to detail, they are willing to look at all sides of an issue and examine all angles. You on the other hand prefer to emote, while concealing your feelings with seemingly high-minded statements that you try to pass off as objective.

I have concluded there are two main things that you struggle in coping with:

1. Logical rigor, and

2. Intellectual sophistication.

This is why you have a very difficult time keeping up with me in conversations. But I am also very proud of you for the progress you have made over the years. Conversing with me has elevated you and forced you to be better.

You're welcome, friend. You're welcome.

 

[calitennis127]

When were you wrong about Nadal? That's too ridiculous to evben answer.

Maybe because you suffer from poor memory, I don't know. I never made any specific predictions about what Nadal would or would not do. I have always understood how and why he succeeds and have understood that he can win anywhere for those reasons. I maintain that I understand the reasons for his success better than even his fans.

Wait, it never should have gone to a fifth?

Correct. If you recall, there was an overnight delay in the match after the 3rd set tiebreak and Djokovic came out Saturday and played a very poor 4th set. Against Federer at Wimbledon I can understand having lapses because if you have a bad 10 minutes, you can lose 4 or 5 games with aces and winners zooming past you. But against Nadal, Djokovic gets what he wants all the time, which is long rallies that allow him to work the point. He should have been ready to kill it in the 4th set but was not.

How has Federer fared vs. Nadal on clay since?

That's not the point. The point is that many of their clay-court matches were closely contested and were winnable for Federer. Yet you talked about their matches as though Federer had no chance at all in the match-up.

Oh excuse me person on the internet who's to inept to fact check, Federer wasn't up 40-15. He never had set points on serve to begin with. At 5-2, with Nadal serving, he had a set point, and hit a drop shot just wide. Nadal proceeded to hold serve to make it 5-3, and then broke Federer the next game without Roger ever having set points on serve. So yeah, you literally are making shit up...AGAIN.

Amazing how Federer got a set at Roland Garros AGAINST Nadal to that point given the utter impossibility of the match-up for him, isn't it? Your tennis analysis would not allow for that possibility to ever occur. Yet it did. Just astounding.