2019 Roland Garros Semifinals: Nadal vs. Federer

[MartyB]

I know he's beloved, but do you really think it's just him and his magic? The Fedal rivalry has done wonders for men's tennis. And there are a lot of us who love Rafa, don't forget.

Oh I get how loved Nadal is and well deserved. The man has done something that will never be matched again at RG. In my humble opinion and with supportive commentary Feds matches have had far more fans present and buzz. Is it because they might not see him ever again sure. I just think that Fed plays a brand of tennis that those fans love more than even Nadal.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The notion that Fed won the match as Stan was physically exhausted is total rubbish. People who actually saw the match know that Stan was fine from the beginning to the end physically. It was a hard fought victory (especially, the quick break back in 3rd set, holding a 10 minute long game at the end of the third set, and a superb volley from behind himself in the TB) and no way can it be written off saying Stan was tired and did not have much in the tank.

The interesting idea is that after encountering Stan's heavy balls, Ralph's balls will be like facing spring winds after a hurricane just left.

 

[Moxie]

Oh I get how loved Nadal is and well deserved. The man has done something that will never be matched again at RG. In my humble opinion and with supportive commentary Feds matches have had far more fans present and buzz. Is it because they might not see him ever again sure. I just think that Fed plays a brand of tennis that those fans love more than even Nadal.

Roger plays beautiful tennis, that cannot be denied. Most of the time. But Rafa plays an astonishing version of tennis, and there are people that love it, because it's so thrilling. It's kind of apples and oranges. Club players recognize their tennis in Roger's. No one who plays thinks they can do what Nadal does, most of the time. It's a strange and raised-by-wolves game. Not everyone embraces it, but a lot of us do. Roger has fans who recognize his game in their own. (However much they're kidding themselves.) Rafa's game is not one that everyone can play, so some folks call it ugly or non-traditional, or whatever. I call it amazing. The irritating thing from some folks is that they think they own the notion of what style/taste is in tennis.

 

[El Dude]

Not to be mean, (but, hey, why not? So many Fedfans are really mean all the time,) but you folks have to be wondering how this deep run at RG hurts/helps him for W. Obviously, if he beats Rafa at RG, finally, you can dine out on that forever. And if he should win it all, I'm guessing you'd trade the double-career Slam for one more Wimbledon. But say he just has to work hard for nought. You gonna be OK with that?

I guess I'm in the minority, but for me winning isn't everything - and greatness isn't only about the title. Reaching the SF after three years off clay is quite an achievement, and reaffirms that not only is he still an elite player, but he's an elite clay-courter.

Of course I want him to win, but at this point everything is a bonus.

If RG keeps him from bagging Stuttgart, no biggie. He's at 101 titles and will get his 110 before he retires. That's a few more this year, a few next, and one or two in 2021, the year he turns 40 and his last year, if I were to guess.

And I just don't see RG--even winning it--as impacting his chances at Wimbledon, unless he hurts himself in the next two matches.

 

[El Dude]

Roger plays beautiful tennis, that cannot be denied. Most of the time. But Rafa plays an astonishing version of tennis, and there are people that love it, because it's so thrilling. It's kind of apples and oranges. Club players recognize their tennis in Roger's. No one who plays thinks they can do what Nadal does, most of the time. It's a strange and raised-by-wolves game. Not everyone embraces it, but a lot of us do. Roger has fans who recognize his game in their own. (However much they're kidding themselves.) Rafa's game is not one that everyone can play, so some folks call it ugly or non-traditional, or whatever. I call it amazing. The irritating thing from some folks is that they think they own the notion of what style/taste is in tennis.

I couldn't agree more and have said similar things. I think you highlight how they're both unique and amazing in their own ways. Roger is the closest we've ever seen to the archetype of the "perfect tennis player." But Rafa is wholy unique in a way that Roger isn't. If all players want to be like Roger and fall short to varying degrees, no player can ever be like Rafa - and maybe no player even tries.

They're a mythic pair of archetypes: Gilgamesh and Enkidu? Lancelot and Percival?

 

[DarthFed]

Not to be mean, (but, hey, why not? So many Fedfans are really mean all the time,) but you folks have to be wondering how this deep run at RG hurts/helps him for W. Obviously, if he beats Rafa at RG, finally, you can dine out on that forever. And if he should win it all, I'm guessing you'd trade the double-career Slam for one more Wimbledon. But say he just has to work hard for nought. You gonna be OK with that?

It is a concern. I'd like to see him skip Halle at this point. This will end up being 11 matches on clay assuming he loses and it would likely become 16 matches if he plays Halle and reaches the final. I think that's too much in the 6 weeks before Wimbledon.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

It is a concern. I'd like to see him skip Halle at this point. This will be 11 matches on clay and assuming he loses it could become 16 matches if he plays the Halle final. I think that's too much in the 6 weeks before Wimbledon.

No, not concerned. He should play Halle (and skip Stuttgart as he has already announced).

But, after Wimby, Cincy and only Cincy before USO.

 

[MartyB]

Roger plays beautiful tennis, that cannot be denied. Most of the time. But Rafa plays an astonishing version of tennis, and there are people that love it, because it's so thrilling. It's kind of apples and oranges. Club players recognize their tennis in Roger's. No one who plays thinks they can do what Nadal does, most of the time. It's a strange and raised-by-wolves game. Not everyone embraces it, but a lot of us do. Roger has fans who recognize his game in their own. (However much they're kidding themselves.) Rafa's game is not one that everyone can play, so some folks call it ugly or non-traditional, or whatever. I call it amazing. The irritating thing from some folks is that they think they own the notion of what style/taste is in tennis.

Fed plays more than just beautiful tennis. His movement is flawless his incredible knowledge of court geometry & adaptation to his opponent looks the power and depth and acute angles and yes net play is extraordinary. I've been watching tennis for a long and have seen many of the greats. Plus the ability to alter his playing style vs his opponent is dramatic. I marvel and in awe of Nadal's game his tenacity strength and intensity. We are blessed to have them both in our sport.

 

[DarthFed]

No, not concerned. He should play Halle (and skip Stuttgart as he has already announced).

But, after Wimby, Cincy and only Cincy before USO.

You'd have had his ass playing MC and Barcelona too I get you can't get enough of watching our boy play but the guy is frickin ancient and he will need a good rest. Clay as expected has been way more demanding. Matches like this one today and Coric in Rome takes a toll.

 

[Moxie]

The notion that Fed won the match as Stan was physically exhausted is total rubbish. People who actually saw the match know that Stan was fine from the beginning to the end physically. It was a hard fought victory (especially, the quick break back in 3rd set, holding a 10 minute long game at the end of the third set, and a superb volley from behind himself in the TB) and no way can it be written off saying Stan was tired and did not have much in the tank.

The interesting idea is that after encountering Stan's heavy balls, Ralph's balls will be like facing spring winds after a hurricane just left.

I don't know how you say that Stan's recent 5-setter didn't affect him. As I said, the commentators said it was clear. Not to diminish what Roger did, but Roger was on a run of straight sets. Wawrinka's legs seemed clearly taxed, in the last 2 sets. Anyway, yes, Stan hits a heavy ball, but so does Rafa, particularly on clay. Your notion that they are lesser is, frankly, risible.

 

[Moxie]

Everyone has been gaming Roger's chances on this thread, so let me game Rafa's. As much as he didn't have his best clay season, he found his game in Rome, and has been playing some immaculate clay tennis during this tournament. Dropped a set to Goffin? Not that astonishing. Goffin is tricky, and Nadal dropped his intensity, much as he did to lose the set to Djoker in Rome. That one was really all Rafa's fault, and I give Goffin more credit in his round, but still...you do what you have to do, and keep the powder dry for the big moments. I don't think that shows "vulnerability." Basically, Rafa is fresh, and playing on a court that serves him well. Roger will be rested enough, but if he couldn't get past a fairly tired Wawrinka in less than 4, he's not going to beat a rested Nadal, even in 5. I see that a lot of folks here want to say that Wawrinka was perfectly fine. I thought he started to look pretty knackered in the legs in the 3rd. Roger will try to be aggressive, but he's gonna get passed for it He'll have to serve better than he did v. Stan, convert more break chances, and stop hitting that tired shit into the net.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I don't know how you say that Stan's recent 5-setter didn't affect him. As I said, the commentators said it was clear. Not to diminish what Roger did, but Roger was on a run of straight sets. Wawrinka's legs seemed clearly taxed, in the last 2 sets. Anyway, yes, Stan hits a heavy ball, but so does Rafa, particularly on clay. Your notion that they are lesser is, frankly, risible.

Did you see the match? I saw it. I did not see any effect. No, commentators did not say anything clearly. At one point in the third set one of them said, may be Stan is feeling it. It is not any more scientific than what any other person observes.

 

[Moxie]

Did you see the match? I saw it. I did not see any effect. No, commentators did not say anything clearly. At one point in the third set one of them said, may be Stan is feeling it. It is not any more scientific than what any other person observes.

I did see that match. Jim Courier specifically called out Stan having an issue with his legs. He pointed out the exact moment. (It was like at hour 2:39. He said, "Mark this time.") And not a long time later the other commentator said, "Oh, now I see it." If you really think that Stan wasn't tired at all, then you have your Fed goggles on. I'm not saying that it wasn't a good win for Roger. But I'm saying that those who couldn't see Stan a bit flagged are kidding themselves.

 

[El Dude]

Moxie, I don't think anyone is arguing that Roger is favored or even very close...only that he has a chance, and better odds than in years. Do you disagree with that? I can't help but think "The lady doth protest too much."

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Moxie, I don't think anyone is arguing that Roger is favored or even very close...only that he has a chance, and better odds than in years. Do you disagree with that? I can't help but think "The lady doth protest too much."

There is no doubt that Rafa is the favorite to win this match.

However, instead of the 88% and 12% that bookies are projecting, I would put it at 65% and 35%.

I am ready to vote and my vote is Roger in 4 (even though before RG began, I predicted that this SF would happen and Rafa would win it).
After seeing the intensity shown by Roger in the QF, I changed my mind. Stan on clay is no joke (the 22-3 h2h is totally misleading).

 

[Moxie]

Moxie, I don't think anyone is arguing that Roger is favored or even very close...only that he has a chance, and better odds than in years. Do you disagree with that? I can't help but think "The lady doth protest too much."

Let's be frank. So many Feddies arguing his options and I doth protest too much? The 11 time winner, and god forbid I argue his cause. I was only putting up the case for Rafa. Which is frankly, from a position of strength.

 

[El Dude]

There is no doubt that Rafa is the favorite to win this match.

However, instead of the 88% and 12% that bookies are projecting, I would put it at 65% and 35%.

I am ready to vote and my vote is Roger in 4 (even though before RG began, I predicted that this SF would happen and Rafa would win it).
After seeing the intensity shown by Roger in the QF, I changed my mind. Stan on clay is no joke (the 22-3 h2h is totally misleading).

I'd go with 70/30. In 2013, probably when the match-up was the most lopsided, I'd go 95/5...if that. In 2016, when both were struggling, I might have gone 90/10.

I voted Roger in 4 out of solidarity and a slight tingling feeling that my head says is wishful thinking, but my heart says is a hunch that he can pull this off.

 

[El Dude]

Let's be frank. So many Feddies arguing his options and I doth protest too much? The 11 time winner, and god forbid I argue his cause. I was only putting up the case for Rafa. Which is frankly, from a position of strength.

The point is, his case doesn't need to be argued - and you're protesting so much at people saying Roger has more than a snowball's chance makes me wonder if there's a twinge of doubt. I hope Rafa feels the same .

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The point is, his case doesn't need to be argued - and you're protesting so much at people saying Roger has more than a snowball's chance makes me wonder if there's a twinge of doubt. I hope Rafa feels the same .

There is certainly a twinge of doubt in Rafa. Normally, a pre-match presser for Fake Humble Rafa will go like this.

Journalist: Rafa, you are playing Mr. Nobody in the next round. What are your opinions about it.

Rafa: Nobody is playing extremely well, No. In the previous round he beat a blindman in five sets. In the round before that
he beat a dead man in five sets. Therefore, I should be very careful. I should play my very best to have an iota
of a chance in this match, No.

But, what happened in this presser.

Journalist: Roger said he is happy to be in Sf and happy to play Rafa. What do you think of it.
Rafa: I believe in the first part; Not so sure about the second part though.

So, what happened to all the fake-humbleness. Ralph is trying to play mind games here, trying to remind Roger of the old history.
Why does he feel the need to do it? There is a twinge of doubt in him.

 

[Moxie]

The point is, his case doesn't need to be argued - and you're protesting so much at people saying Roger has more than a snowball's chance makes me wonder if there's a twinge of doubt. I hope Rafa feels the same .

Am I really? Protesting too much? All of the Fed fans are arguing that he might have that snowball's chance. Fair enough. Are you saying that I'm being mean just for arguing Rafa's side? Maybe Roger is the underdog here, but it has perhaps escaped your notice that there are a lot of folks around here that say terrible things about Rafa. All the time. I'm defending my guy. Is that so bad? Also, you seem to be saying that it's unkind to argue against the underdog. I'm sure you don't mean that. I have my opinion about the match, and I think it's owed to me.

EDIT: As to twinge of doubt...No.