ABN AMRO, Rotterdam, Netherlands, APT 500

[Moxie]

Not that I want to scrap with nadalgoat2. I also think that the rivalry is epic, but nadalgoat2 appears to be selective in giving examples of 'epic' matches. Maybe he or she forgot that AO 2012 and UO 2011 were epic as well, if not more epic than the examples given.

OK, but you're just replying to her/his own partisanship. Which is fair, as it's so much on display. But, sure, other ones could be added. To me, the most epic between the two of them are near mirror-images of each other: the 2012 AO final and the 2013 RG SF.

 

[atttomole]

OK, but you're just replying to her/his own partisanship. Which is fair, as it's so much on display. But, sure, other ones could be added. To me, the most epic between the two of them are near mirror-images of each other: the 2012 AO final and the 2013 RG SF.

Those two were epic. For me the most epic are AO 2012 and UO 2011.

 

[Moxie]

Those two were epic. For me the most epic are AO 2012 and UO 2011.

I'm continually surprised by how many people cite USO 2011 final. It only went 4, Djokovic had medical issues, and Nadal was unable to take advantage, due to psychological damage. Surely 2013 between them was better, due to no MTO? That's my prejudice, of course. I'd revisit 2011, if others think it was that fine.

 

[DarthFed]

I think 2011 USO gets overrated too. It had an insane stretch near the end of the 3rd but aside from that it was one way traffic.

I agree with Moxie that the two epic slam matches were 2012 AO and 2013 RG. I'd actually say most of their memorable matches have been best of 3 setters. The first two in 2011, and then 2009 Madrid, 2008 Queens, and a couple others.

 

[atttomole]

I'm continually surprised by how many people cite USO 2011 final. It only went 4, Djokovic had medical issues, and Nadal was unable to take advantage, due to psychological damage. Surely 2013 between them was better, due to no MTO? That's my prejudice, of course. I'd revisit 2011, if others think it was that fine.

UO 2011 went to 4 sets, but the quality of tennis was very high, notwithstanding Nadal's psychological issues.

 

[DarthFed]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My point was how long going backwards you get to claim "geriatric". Also, if he lost back then because he was old, then how can he be 7-8 years older now and be winning? He lost those matches not because he was old, but because he wasn't as good. Period.

See this is where you put words in my mouth. I never say he loses because he's old. I just point out on occasions like this that yes he is ancient and as gifted as he is he ain't 25 anymore. You're acting like he's always been in his prime despite all the lean years he's had in his 30's. By the same token we could say Rafa has always been in his prime too. Didn't he have a great 2017 as well after 2.5 bad years? But I'm guessing you won't admit that since you're always quick to say how past his prime Rafa was during most of his beatdowns from Djokovic.

And I still say that even in today's game for true greats it is better to be early 20's than early to mid 30's. If you're going to chastise Roger for missing a few USO finals in his ancient years we can do the same for young Nadal.

 

[atttomole]

I think 2011 USO gets overrated too. It had an insane stretch near the end of the 3rd but aside from that it was one way traffic.

I agree with Moxie that the two epic slam matches were 2012 AO and 2013 RG. I'd actually say most of their memorable matches have been best of 3 setters. The first two in 2011, and then 2009 Madrid, 2008 Queens, and a couple others.

2013 RG was amazing too. However, I still think Nadal was the favorite in that match because it was on clay, even though Djokovic had caught up him. The match was close, but I was not surprised by the result.

 

[Moxie]

I think 2011 USO gets overrated too. It had an insane stretch near the end of the 3rd but aside from that it was one way traffic.

I agree with Moxie that the two epic slam matches were 2012 AO and 2013 RG. I'd actually say most of their memorable matches have been best of 3 setters. The first two in 2011, and then 2009 Madrid, 2008 Queens, and a couple others.

I totally agree with this. I think that the majority of their interesting matches have been best-of-3s, and I agree with all of the ones you cited.

 

[Moxie]

See this is where you put words in my mouth. I never say he loses because he's old. I just point out on occasions like this that yes he is ancient and as gifted as he is he ain't 25 anymore. You're acting like he's always been in his prime despite all the lean years he's had in his 30's. By the same token we could say Rafa has always been in his prime too. Didn't he have a great 2017 as well after 2.5 bad years? But I'm guessing you won't admit that since you're always quick to say how past his prime Rafa was during most of his beatdowns from Djokovic.

And I still say that even in today's game for true greats it is better to be early 20's than early to mid 30's. If you're going to chastise Roger for missing a few USO finals in his ancient years we can do the same for young Nadal.

Kind of hilarious from you to accuse me of putting words in your mouth, when you're forever putting words in mine. You didn't say Roger lost because he was old? You said Djokovic (and others) beat "geriatric" Fed in 2010, '11, etc. How are we supposed to take that, other than that you were blaming his age?

Look, I am a new appreciator of Fed and Rafa finding a new gear after lean years. But don't blame me for citing some lean years from Rafa if you want to cite Roger's lean ones. Still I'm never one that has ever cried that Rafa wasn't fully fit and prime when he went on that losing streak to Djokovic in 2011-12. There's been plenty of ups and downs, but these greats seem to be still finding some up. I'm happy with that.

 

[Moxie]

2013 RG was amazing too. However, I still think Nadal was the favorite in that match because it was on clay, even though Djokovic had caught up him. The match was close, but I was not surprised by the result.

The reason those two particular matches were so interesting is that they were like mirrors of each other. Yes, Nadal was favored at RG in 2013, and he pulled it out. And he was playing better, overall. But Novak mounted a comeback and was up a break in the 5th. Likewise, in AO 2012, Novak was favored and playing better, but Rafa had a break in the 5th and couldn't bring it home. They were 2 great matches, and they effectively cancel each other out.

 

[Andy22]

I'll leave you and nadalgoat2 to duke it out, but what do you NOT think has been "epic" or at least significant about their rivalry?

USO 13, USO 10,FO13 wore great matches, great rallys high level tennis. Also A012,USO11 wore not epic matches, PS I I'm a guy.

 

[Moxie]

USO 13, USO 10,FO13 wore great matches, great rallys high level tennis. Also A012,USO11 wore not epic matches, PS I I'm a guy.

OK, you're a guy. Also not an especially great speller. How can you say that AO 2012 was not epic, if FO 2013 was?

 

[Andy22]

OK, you're a guy. Also not an especially great speller. How can you say that AO 2012 was not epic, if FO 2013 was?

Because djokovic should have won A012 in 4 sets, FO13, more better rallies, both was 100% fit, not as long as A0.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK, you're a guy. Also not an especially great speller.

Do you think he typed u instead of a, accidentally?

p.s. Disclaimer - does not need to be spelled out.

 

[Moxie]

Because djokovic should have won A012 in 4 sets, FO13, more better rallies, both was 100% fit, not as long as A0.

Each should have won the respective match in 4. I can't believe that the length of match matters to you or anyone else, vis-a-vis quality.

 

[Moxie]

Do you think he typed u instead of a, accidentally?

p.s. Disclaimer - does not need to be spelled out.

Oh yuck, GSM. I didn't think you were that person.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Oh yuck, GSM. I didn't think you were that person.

Come on, read my disclaimer.

 

[Moxie]

Come on, read my disclaimer.

I'm not sure what disclaimer turns that into a good joke.

 

[Andy22]

Each should have won the respective match in 4. I can't believe that the length of match matters to you or anyone else, vis-a-vis quality.

I like long tennis matches, The length does not matter to me, but some people do not like 6 hour matches. I'm not saying that A012 was not a good match, it was really good, just not as epic as F013. Plus Nadal did not even win A012.

 

[Moxie]

I like long tennis matches, The length does not matter to me, but some people do not like 6 hour matches. I'm not saying that A012 was not a good match, it was really good, just not as epic as F013. Plus Nadal did not even win A012.

If you weren't so transparent, that might actually be funny. Here's the deal: no matter how much you think Nadal hung the moon, no amount of just saying it will make it so. Complete partisanship is boring. Try arguing better and don't be a such a tool.