2019 Roland Garros Men's Final: Rafael Nadal vs. Dominic Thiem

[calitennis127]

Thiem has been clocked as having the highest avg. speeds on ground strokes on tour. This is what commentators said, and they showed the stats. On a slow court, you need to generate your own power and have a bit more time to do it. On a fast court, Djoker can rush Thiem and not allow Thiem to hurt him that much but on a slow court, Thiem has time to unload his monstrous fh and it is monstrous... Novak can obviously beat him, but on an avg rally, he seems to be at the mercy of Thiem's power...

Again, you are describing the match as far more one-sided than it was. Djokovic won two sets and Thiem won two of the three sets 7-5. Where are you getting this idea that in an average rally Djokovic was at Thiem's mercy?

 

[atttomole]

When Djoker lost to Stan in RG finals, i made no excuses. Unlike some of the fed fanboys here who always make excuses for Fed, i don't make excuses for Rafa or Djoker when i think they meet a player who matches up well against them. When Djoker dominated a red hot Nadal in 7 straight finals in 2011, i made no excuses... Djoker, especially on hards, is a nightmare for Rafa.

Djokovic has a game that is close to perfection, no weaknesses. The only issue with him is that he lacks a finishing shot, especially on a slow court. He has one of the best backhands in the game, ever, and a great fh but his game is based on stepping in, taking ball early, changing directions and employing a 'death by a thousand cuts' tactic to dismember opponents. The usual Djoker point is to hit deep, make opponent move, wait for a short ball and go for winner. He also plays many points where he defends until opponents miss. What he doesn't have is a shot that he can use to hit winners off neutral positions, with ease. Del potro, Stan, Thiem have that. On a fast court, it's not a big deal as Djoker can hit many winners on fast courts by taking ball early... on clay, different story. When Djoker, at his best, faces an in form Thiem or Stan on clay, he seems to almost be 'surviving'.. I always feel Stan or Thiem can end the point easily whilst Djoker has to work for it, hit 2-4 shots to maybe get a short ball. Thiem or Stan can just out of nowhere end the point... Not many can do this but on clay, this is hard to handle for a guy like Novak... you can't just defend against that type of power, you have to counter it with your own power, which novak lacks a bit of on clay, relative to Thiem and Stan.

This post shows that you the most unbiased fan on these boards. And as a fan of two players, it is very difficult to be biased.

 

[calitennis127]

of course Djokovic has beaten them and will beat them but i don't like the way the matches play out, it seems Djokovic is in survival mode, putting balls back in play waiting for them to miss. Djokovic is so good that he beats them but on days when those guys are IN FORM, Djoker is vulnerable, on slower courts. Djokovic tends to get too defensive against these guys and resorts to defending like a mad man but the issue is that these two guys have the ability to pulverize shots for winners, even from neutral positions... so Novak sort of plays 'preying' they miss.. i hate that. He must hate it too as it must make him feel like these guys simply have more shot making... He beats them more than these guys beat him simply because Djokovic is one of the GOATS so he's very difficult to beat. When these guys are on their game, on clay or slow court, it's a big problem. Nadal, even though you think he is less talented than Novak, can actually deal with thiem and Stan more easily... he has the ability to use his heavy spin, angles to get them out of position and then hit winners off them.... It's just a different match-up. These guys like to tee off Novak's balls but don't like Nadal's heavy balls... Nadal hurts them, especially to bh side.. then Nadal goes down the line or inside out with his fh, it really messed with them. Just look at how usually these guys out-winner Novak on clay but Nadal out-winners them... this tells you a lot.

I think the main reason that Nadal tortures Thiem and Wawrinka is that he is far more comfortable spending all match whipping shots at short angles than Djokovic is, plus he is not as defensive when serving. I cannot stress enough that Djokovic's serving (by which I mean service games overall) is the biggest problem against Thiem and Wawrinka. Those guys consistently get deep shots back on their returns and he starts muscling moonballs up the middle of the court.

Let's not forget that Djokovic went something like 6 for 11 on break points against Thiem.....so this idea that he couldn't do damage against Thiem in rallies is nonsense. Djokovic's return games were fine for the most part.....what cost him were some atrocious games on his own serve. You don't see that from Nadal.

Also.....your "slow court" excuse for Djokovic against Thiem and Wawrinka doesn't completely hold up. Let's not forget that Wawrinka took him to 5 sets in the 2013 US Open semifinal and then beat him in the 2016 US Open final. I doubt you would call that a slow court.

I think it is quite apparent that Djokovic's main weakness is handling power hitters in rhythm while HE is serving. I have more confidence in Djokovic when he is returning against Wawrinka and Thiem than when he is serving. The latter is torturous to watch. He just dribbles and dribbles before dumping in a weak serve that gets pummeled. Then he fights to get whatever he can over the net.

 

[calitennis127]

This is my favorite post in the whole thread. For real. Can we all please finally learn since it's been 12 times already: unless it's against Djokovic, can we please stop pretending like someone has a chance at RG vs. Nadal? Thanks.

That's why I was very depressed yesterday after Djokovic lost. I did not think Thiem had much chance at all.

 

[MikeOne]

Mike, your tennis-centered universe does not allow you to see outside of the box. Tennis has its unique physical challenges but the average ATP player is nowhere near as athletic as the average NBA or NFL player. Please stop deluding yourself.

Wonder why a marathon runner is out of gas when playing intense rallies on the baseline? Totally different exercises, the body adapts to different demands. You may think 'marathon runner has more stamina than tennis player', think again...depends on exercise.

who's talking about athleticism? we were talking about the brutality/physicality... different story. What is more brutal, playing 38 mins in a basketball game where you share the workload with teammates or 5 hours of intense baseline rallies? you know the answer.

btw, athleticism is relative. In basketball you need to be taller, jump higher and have long arms, big hands. Many, like Lebron, Westbrook, the greek freak, are athletic specimens but there are a few who are just there because they are tall yet slow. So Lebron is more athletic than Nadal on a basketball court, of course! Lebron has a much longer wingspan, is much taller. Can Lebron match nadal in footspeed and stamina? remember, bigger guys usually have issues with stamina...

In football, running backs and receivers need to be fast, athletic, what about offensive line men? they can be super slow and can be overweight.

You can't very easily compare players across sports... in a basketball court, Lebron > Nadal.. what about a tennis court? Can Lebron james move from side to side, using quick steps and run back and forth... and do it for 5 hours? Can LeBron James do what Ronaldo or Messi do on a soccer field? Surely, Messi would be sh&t on a basketball court.

to just talk about athleticism as if the same physical traits are needed for all sports is to ignore reality. Why isn't Monfils GOAT in tennis? he is 6'4 and has the physical attributes of a basketball player, see him dunk easily in youtube.

 

[the AntiPusher]

of course Djokovic has beaten them and will beat them but i don't like the way the matches play out, it seems Djokovic is in survival mode, putting balls back in play waiting for them to miss. Djokovic is so good that he beats them but on days when those guys are IN FORM, Djoker is vulnerable, on slower courts. Djokovic tends to get too defensive against these guys and resorts to defending like a mad man but the issue is that these two guys have the ability to pulverize shots for winners, even from neutral positions... so Novak sort of plays 'preying' they miss.. i hate that. He must hate it too as it must make him feel like these guys simply have more shot making... He beats them more than these guys beat him simply because Djokovic is one of the GOATS so he's very difficult to beat. When these guys are on their game, on clay or slow court, it's a big problem. Nadal, even though you think he is less talented than Novak, can actually deal with thiem and Stan more easily... he has the ability to use his heavy spin, angles to get them out of position and then hit winners off them.... It's just a different match-up. These guys like to tee off Novak's balls but don't like Nadal's heavy balls... Nadal hurts them, especially to bh side.. then Nadal goes down the line or inside out with his fh, it really messed with them. Just look at how usually these guys out-winner Novak on clay but Nadal out-winners them... this tells you a lot.

Typically the only way to defeat Novak is at a Slam is to hit through him..I have seen Murray, Nadal and Federer just play a better game of strategic tennis but in the Finals but it's rare.. Novak defense is usually the decider .

 

[atttomole]

You should watch Hamburg 2007 and Madrid 2009

You were able to find Darth's post from this many posts. Nadal does get tired, but when does, it is news. Long time no see.

 

[lob]

Question for the Fed Fans from the Highest ranking Elder of Rafa's fandom. Fed has been in 76 grand slams and Rafa has been in only 56 slams, wouldn't it be fair to say that Rafa is the true GOAT?

Several books have been written on this important topic. Each book justifies its own conclusion by cherry picking data with prejudice. As to your question, one book answers 'yes of course'. Another book points out that the player who played 76 slams played 20 of them after he had turned 32, so it isn't fair. A third book takes a dialectical approach claiming that the usage 'slams' is unfair when 2 out of every three slams are on clay. There are numerous other books on this topic. My book says that life's unfair.

 

[calitennis127]

Wonder why a marathon runner is out of gas when playing intense rallies on the baseline? Totally different exercises, the body adapts to different demands. You may think 'marathon runner has more stamina than tennis player', think again...depends on exercise.

Never said that about marathon runners. I have actually told Moxie something similar to what you just said about marathon running.

who's talking about athleticism? we were talking about the brutality/physicality... different story. What is more brutal, playing 38 mins in a basketball game where you share the workload with teammates or 5 hours of intense baseline rallies? you know the answer.

That really depends. First of all, not every tennis match is like the 2012 Australian Open final between Djokovic and Nadal, so please stop acting like every match is that brutal. Second, in basketball you have to withstand contact (running through screens, getting fouled, running into people, etc.) far more than in tennis. In basketball, you also don't get the same kind of periodic breaks between points that tennis players do.

btw, athleticism is relative. In basketball you need to be taller, jump higher and have long arms, big hands. Many, like Lebron, Westbrook, the greek freak, are athletic specimens but there are a few who are just there because they are tall yet slow.

That's true but we are talking strictly about level of exertion.

So Lebron is more athletic than Nadal on a basketball court, of course! Lebron has a much longer wingspan, is much taller. Can Lebron match nadal in footspeed and stamina?

Yes on footspeed, without a doubt. So can most NBA guards. Stamina is a tougher call but footspeed is more significant and LeBron has at least as much as Nadal.

remember, bigger guys usually have issues with stamina...

Mike do you seriously think Nadal is more athletic - in terms of foot speed and quickness - than Siakum of the Raptors?

In football, running backs and receivers need to be fast, athletic,

And they have to cope with getting hit repeatedly.

what about offensive line men? they can be super slow and can be overweight.

Not as much anymore. To move against d-lineman nowadays you have to be athletic laterally. Those linemen also have to deal with getting hit as opposed to just having their cardio tested like tennis players.

You can't very easily compare players across sports... in a basketball court, Lebron > Nadal.. what about a tennis court? Can Lebron james move from side to side, using quick steps and run back and forth... and do it for 5 hours?

Yes, he can. So can most NBA guards and all NFL receivers, defensive backs, and running backs. I don't think you realize how athletic most NFL defensive backs are and how seamless tennis-style movement is for them.

to just talk about athleticism as if the same physical traits are needed for all sports is to ignore reality. Why isn't Monfils GOAT in tennis? he is 6'4 and has the physical attributes of a basketball player, see him dunk easily in youtube.

Tennis can be very strenuous if there are long rallies over and over. But the average point entails a few hard swings and some intense side-to-side movement. That is not as brutal as you are trying to make it sound.

Why isn't Monfils the GOAT? Because of a number of mental and strategic reasons. I never said that athleticism was everything, so why are you arguing against a straw man argument?

I simply said that calling the first set "brutal" is excessive on your part. There were some very strenuous rallies but I wouldn't call the set as a whole brutal.

 

[Carol]

Spectacular add by Nike to celebrate the Nadal's 12 RG title

 

[atttomole]

Question for the Fed Fans from the Highest ranking Elder of Rafa's fandom. Fed has been in 76 grand slams and Rafa has been in only 56 slams, wouldn't it be fair to say that Rafa is the true GOAT?

I don't think so. It is simply that Roger is so good that he reaches the latter stages of most tournaments that he plays. The more tournaments you participate in, the more you are likely to lose. That is also why Roger has held the number 1 ranking for so long. And there is the age difference. Finally, Rafa skipped many grand slam tournaments.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

When Djoker lost to Stan in RG finals, i made no excuses. Unlike some of the fed fanboys here who always make excuses for Fed, i don't make excuses for Rafa or Djoker when i think they meet a player who matches up well against them. When Djoker dominated a red hot Nadal in 7 straight finals in 2011, i made no excuses... Djoker, especially on hards, is a nightmare for Rafa.

Djokovic has a game that is close to perfection, no weaknesses. The only issue with him is that he lacks a finishing shot, especially on a slow court. He has one of the best backhands in the game, ever, and a great fh but his game is based on stepping in, taking ball early, changing directions and employing a 'death by a thousand cuts' tactic to dismember opponents. The usual Djoker point is to hit deep, make opponent move, wait for a short ball and go for winner. He also plays many points where he defends until opponents miss. What he doesn't have is a shot that he can use to hit winners off neutral positions, with ease. Del potro, Stan, Thiem have that. On a fast court, it's not a big deal as Djoker can hit many winners on fast courts by taking ball early... on clay, different story. When Djoker, at his best, faces an in form Thiem or Stan on clay, he seems to almost be 'surviving'.. I always feel Stan or Thiem can end the point easily whilst Djoker has to work for it, hit 2-4 shots to maybe get a short ball. Thiem or Stan can just out of nowhere end the point... Not many can do this but on clay, this is hard to handle for a guy like Novak... you can't just defend against that type of power, you have to counter it with your own power, which novak lacks a bit of on clay, relative to Thiem and Stan.

That is ridiculous comment. It is well known that Nadalites are the worst excuse makers. It is also well known that Nadal has never lost a match when he was fully fit.

 

[Carol]

That is ridiculous comment. It is well known that Nadalites are the worst excuse makers. It is also well known that Nadal has never lost a match when he was fully fit.

LOL like you Federites are giving a good example.......¨mono" for two years, back problems for the whole career (everytime he has lost) his hand, withdrew from Italian Open because his right leg "injury" , ok....whatever.

 

[calitennis127]

you must be confused.... it's the Nadal haters that act bizarre when nadal wins... just read some of these posts. 'thiem was tired' 'If only Novak would've make finals' LOL and then, of course, the Nadal haters so worried about Nadal surpassing Fed in slams that they even attack Fed, questioning his priorities! Think about that! clueless fans questioning Fed's priorities? as if they are Fed and are Fed's mind... LOL Fed knows his priorities and only he knows what they are and he made it a priority for play RG. There is nothing to question here, just nadal haters in disarray, very worried that maybe RG took something out of Fed and Nadal will get his 20 soon. It's actually a bit funny..

Mike, if there was nothing to taking off from Roland Garros, then Federer would not have done it in recent years. Darth is right that he did it for sentimental reasons.

You act like we're calling for something that Federer has never done before. We're not.

 

[kskate2]

I called it 3 weeks ago

 

[brokenshoelace]

Spectacular add by Nike to celebrate the Nadal's 12 RG title

Honestly compared to the absolutely amazing ads Nike have been doing lately, this feels lazy and very quickly thrown together by some random intern lol.

 

[Moxie]

@DarthFed, @Front242, @Fiero425: You all made comments about Nadal "juicing" during the Live Chat. (Rather surprising from Fiero, as that's not usually his jam.) I have told you I won't let them pass. Darth for one, and many others lamenting it wasn't Novak to face Rafa today, as the only one with a chance to beat Nadal. Had it been Novak in the final, and he'd won, history tells us it wouldn't have been in straights, and it would have been a hard fight. Had that happened, would you have been questioning how Novak could have so much energy and stamina, after 3 straight days of matches, and 3+ hours v. Thiem yesterday? A hint of suspicion, or even half as many implications that he dopes? I would suggest not...that you would just be crowing that someone took down Rafa at RG. And you wonder at Rafa's fitness today, with snide remarks about cheating, even though he is the one that had a relatively easy match on Friday, and the much easier path to the final than Thiem.

Asking for a friend.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Question for the Fed Fans from the Highest ranking Elder of Rafa's fandom. Fed has been in 76 grand slams and Rafa has been in only 56 slams, wouldn't it be fair to say that Rafa is the true GOAT?

No.

 

[Carol]

If I would be one of those three posters I would be very quiet........don't pull my tongue.......

 

[DarthFed]

who are you to set roger's priorities?

This is a message board FFS. We are posting opinions here. IMO Fed's scheduling is a mistake. IMO if Fed is seriously prioritizing "making an appearance on clay" over putting himself in the best position possible at Wimbledon he is an absolute moron without a competitive bone in his body. Truthfully I think Roger believes it won't affect him come Wimbledon, that remains to be seen.