ATP 250 Brisbane

[Front242]

Look at it this way, if you took every single stat from every match he's played, you would end up with way less points won from winners. What does that tell you? I'll leave it at that 'cos I know the answer.

 

[Carol]

How in the name of hell is anything I said not true? Do guys like Roger run down every point like their lives depended on it? No. That kind of play is defensive, not offensive. Nothing at all ridiculous about it, it's true. If he were more aggressive he wouldn't play crazy long matches. Early rounds of Wimbledon, Nadal is either in a 5 set dogfight typically or he's already lost. Meanwhile Federer is blasting guys off the court in less than 90 minutes. That's 'cos he's a way more offensive/aggressive player.

Ay, come on , you are passing the ridiculous line so far, have you really watched the Roger's matches or you are one of his fans so blind that you don't see him running and trying to reach any ball like everyone else? the big difference is that he never has had a good legs like Muz, Novak and Rafa and his big advantage always has been his good serve which has helped him to make less effort but obviously without that good serve he wouldn't won half of the titles that he got.
I don't care if you dislike the Nadal's game, there are enough people around the world which like him a lot but at least you should have a little more respect for him though he has a huge difference H2H with your ídolo, but it's clear that I can't ask you such request, your hatred goes more far than that (of course I know Federer's fans that have a big admiration for Rafa in all the ways)

 

[Puppet Master]

Who said he only defends? Why can't anyone read here lol. :cover

You said that he defends more than he attacks. I am not saying that Nadal's winner count puts everyone to shame, but I already said he is forced to defend, because of his stroke mechanics.
This is very interesting to me at least, and if people want I can make a thread where we discuss this, but consider this Front:
Being offensive/defensive is only determined by the pace, spin and depth of your shots. Using this, we could make archetypes that all players fit in, or most players at least.
But it's too much work, and it has probably been done many times before.
I know El Dude would love this.

 

[Front242]

How in the name of hell is anything I said not true? Do guys like Roger run down every point like their lives depended on it? No. That kind of play is defensive, not offensive. Nothing at all ridiculous about it, it's true. If he were more aggressive he wouldn't play crazy long matches. Early rounds of Wimbledon, Nadal is either in a 5 set dogfight typically or he's already lost. Meanwhile Federer is blasting guys off the court in less than 90 minutes. That's 'cos he's a way more offensive/aggressive player.

Ay, come on , you are passing the ridiculous line so far, have you really watched the Roger's matches or you are one of his fans so blind that you don't see him running and trying to reach any ball like everyone else? the big difference is that he never has had a good legs like Muz, Novak and Rafa and his big advantage always has been his good serve which has helped him to make less effort but obviously without that good serve he wouldn't won half of the titles that he got.
I don't care if you dislike the Nadal's game, there are enough people around the world which like him a lot but at least you should have a little more respect for him though he has a huge difference H2H with your ídolo, but it's clear that I can't ask you such request, your hatred goes more far than that (of course I know Federer's fans that have a big admiration for Rafa in all the ways)

No he doesn't run after every ball like his life depended on it. He knows when to just not waste energy, cause unnecessary wear and tear and not risk injury. He hits way more winners and plays far shorter matches on average. How can you even debate facts? For the record, recent stats have shown Federer has 2nd highest average speed on court after Murray so you're wrong, again that "he never has had a good legs like Muz, Novak and Rafa".

Right so Federer wouldn't have won so many titles 'cos of his serve. And Nadal, Djokovic and Murray wouldn't have won so many 'cos of their stamina. What's your point exactly other than sour grapes that Federer has a much better serve than Nadal? :s

You didn't even read my posts properly, it's just yap, yap, yap all the time. I cited the Monte Carlo 2010 final was a great match that I enjoyed and Nadal hit loads of winners. Try and read without bias and actually read posts properly for once. Just 'cos I don't like Nadal doesn't mean I didn't give him praise. You're unreal. I describe accurately how Nadal plays and you just reply with the usual angry fangirl reply. It's actually impossible to write anything here these days relating to Nadal without some of you taking offense to pretty much everything including the truth.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

This doesn't change........

Not my fault. He does hit a few more at times, usually on clay.

Well, I see that you only like to remember his worst matches, I mean when he has played bad. Yesterday I was watching the AO 2009 final (guess against who...:snicker) and he hit an amazing shots, oh! by the way was on HC

Here are the stats from 2009 AO final you are talking about.

Winners Fed-71 Rafa-50
Unforced errors Fed-64 Rafa-41.

Fed hit 21 more winners than Rafa, but had 23 more UFE than Rafa.

Now, don't tell me that Rafa won the match and after all the objective is to win the match. We all know that. We are talking about hitting winners here.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Not my fault. He does hit a few more at times, usually on clay.

Well, I see that you only like to remember his worst matches, I mean when he has played bad. Yesterday I was watching the AO 2009 final (guess against who...:snicker) and he hit an amazing shots, oh! by the way was on HC

Here are the stats from 2009 AO final you are talking about.

Winners Fed-71 Rafa-50
Unforced errors Fed-64 Rafa-41.

Fed hit 21 more winners than Rafa, but had 23 more UFE than Rafa.

Now, don't tell me that Rafa won the match and after all the objective is to win the match. We all know that. We are talking about hitting winners here.

You are damn correct that I will tell you Rafa won the match..They played over 4 1/2 hours.. Probably one of the most offensive players I have ever seen was Gonzo and presently Verdasco..how many slam have they won playing offensive?
Rafa's defense forced Roger out of his comfort zone which produce the ufes.

 

[Front242]

Carol posted a clip of a nice point from the match against Dolgopolov which I even said was a nice shot btw and then stated she could post many others from that match. Here's how all this silliness started.
Well, here are the stats. Take your pick from these many winners, Carol. There were 4 (6 if you want to count the 2 aces as winners). A whole 4, yes. Now, please don't go telling us Federer fans we're talking rubbish when we're giving you actual facts. No one is or was trying to cause any argument here, except you. We were merely discussing winners and you clearly didn't even watch that match properly at all when you said you could post many more. You have 3 more to show us and 2 aces :cover

- Dolgopolov's 1st serve % in set 1 was 38%.
- Nadal 1st winner in the match happened in the 9th game, it was an ace.
- Nadal 1st baseline winner in the match happened in the 9th game too, a backhand winner.
- Nadal didn't hit a forehand winner in the entire match. He came close in the 12th game, but Dolgopolov tried a defensive lob, who didn't reach the net, so technically a forced error.
- Nadal won 62 total points, 56 coming from Dolgopolov's errors (32 unforced).
- Nadal had 6 winners in the match - 2 aces, 2 from the backhand, 1 volley, 1 smash). 3 of those winners happened in the 9th game.

 

[Carol]

How in the name of hell is anything I said not true? Do guys like Roger run down every point like their lives depended on it? No. That kind of play is defensive, not offensive. Nothing at all ridiculous about it, it's true. If he were more aggressive he wouldn't play crazy long matches. Early rounds of Wimbledon, Nadal is either in a 5 set dogfight typically or he's already lost. Meanwhile Federer is blasting guys off the court in less than 90 minutes. That's 'cos he's a way more offensive/aggressive player.

Ay, come on , you are passing the ridiculous line so far, have you really watched the Roger's matches or you are one of his fans so blind that you don't see him running and trying to reach any ball like everyone else? the big difference is that he never has had a good legs like Muz, Novak and Rafa and his big advantage always has been his good serve which has helped him to make less effort but obviously without that good serve he wouldn't won half of the titles that he got.
I don't care if you dislike the Nadal's game, there are enough people around the world which like him a lot but at least you should have a little more respect for him though he has a huge difference H2H with your ídolo, but it's clear that I can't ask you such request, your hatred goes more far than that (of course I know Federer's fans that have a big admiration for Rafa in all the ways)

No he doesn't run after every ball like his life depended on it. He knows when to just not waste energy, cause unnecessary wear and tear and not risk injury. He hits way more winners and plays far shorter matches on average. How can you even debate facts? For the record, recent stats have shown Federer has 2nd highest average speed on court after Murray so you're wrong, again that "he never has had a good legs like Muz, Novak and Rafa".

Right so Federer wouldn't have won so many titles 'cos of his serve. And Nadal, Djokovic and Murray wouldn't have won so many 'cos of their stamina. What's your point exactly other than sour grapes that Federer has a much better serve than Nadal? :s

You didn't even read my posts properly, it's just yap, yap, yap all the time. I cited the Monte Carlo 2010 final was a great match that I enjoyed and Nadal hit loads of winners. Try and read without bias and actually read posts properly for once. Just 'cos I don't like Nadal doesn't mean I didn't give him praise. You're unreal. I describe accurately how Nadal plays and you just reply with the usual angry fangirl reply. It's actually impossible to write anything here these days relating to Nadal without some of you taking offense to pretty much everything including the truth.

LOL excuse moi but you are the fanboy who looks angry and with a lot of sour grapes over your shoulders when something has to do about Nadal. You always are attacking him it doesn't matter of what, you can write what ever you want but then let others to write what ever they think or you are going to tell me that you are the only one having the right to critic, dislike and trying to take any credit to a player who deserves a lot more good things than that ? really? because if someone say something about Roger that you don't like...my goodness, some of you are jumping like a spring. You are unreal!. And as you can see after my "blog vacations" I have not said one word about your fav but if you want I could say more than one thing.......

 

[Carol]

Carol posted a clip of a nice point from the match against Dolgopolov which I even said was a nice shot btw and then stated she could post many others from that match. Here's how all this silliness started.
Well, here are the stats. Take your pick from these many winners, Carol. There were 4 (6 if you want to count the 2 aces as winners). A whole 4, yes. Now, please don't go telling us Federer fans we're talking rubbish when we're giving you actual facts. No one is or was trying to cause any argument here, except you. We were merely discussing winners and you clearly didn't even watch that match properly at all when you said you could post many more. You have 3 more to show us and 2 aces :cover

- Dolgopolov's 1st serve % in set 1 was 38%.
- Nadal 1st winner in the match happened in the 9th game, it was an ace.
- Nadal 1st baseline winner in the match happened in the 9th game too, a backhand winner.
- Nadal didn't hit a forehand winner in the entire match. He came close in the 12th game, but Dolgopolov tried a defensive lob, who didn't reach the net, so technically a forced error.
- Nadal won 62 total points, 56 coming from Dolgopolov's errors (32 unforced).
- Nadal had 6 winners in the match - 2 aces, 2 from the backhand, 1 volley, 1 smash). 3 of those winners happened in the 9th game.

I don't know how much you know about tennis but if you would know a little bit more you would have to know that MANY TIMES the "unforced errors" are FORCED errors....learn!

 

[the AntiPusher]

Carol posted a clip of a nice point from the match against Dolgopolov which I even said was a nice shot btw and then stated she could post many others from that match. Here's how all this silliness started.
Well, here are the stats. Take your pick from these many winners, Carol. There were 4 (6 if you want to count the 2 aces as winners). A whole 4, yes. Now, please don't go telling us Federer fans we're talking rubbish when we're giving you actual facts. No one is or was trying to cause any argument here, except you. We were merely discussing winners and you clearly didn't even watch that match properly at all when you said you could post many more. You have 3 more to show us and 2 aces :cover

- Dolgopolov's 1st serve % in set 1 was 38%.
- Nadal 1st winner in the match happened in the 9th game, it was an ace.
- Nadal 1st baseline winner in the match happened in the 9th game too, a backhand winner.
- Nadal didn't hit a forehand winner in the entire match. He came close in the 12th game, but Dolgopolov tried a defensive lob, who didn't reach the net, so technically a forced error.
- Nadal won 62 total points, 56 coming from Dolgopolov's errors (32 unforced).
- Nadal had 6 winners in the match - 2 aces, 2 from the backhand, 1 volley, 1 smash). 3 of those winners happened in the 9th game.

As Kieran once said so brilliantly about my favorite Rafa hater, "Front is an idiot when it comes to his analysis of Nadal!"

 

[El Dude]

Isn't the bottom line that there are many ways to greatness? And don't we like it that way? I love Roger's graceful, attacking style but would be bored if everyone tried to be "a Federer." The sport is richer for having a wide variety of players.

 

[Carol]

Well, I see that you only like to remember his worst matches, I mean when he has played bad. Yesterday I was watching the AO 2009 final (guess against who...:snicker) and he hit an amazing shots, oh! by the way was on HC

Here are the stats from 2009 AO final you are talking about.

Winners Fed-71 Rafa-50
Unforced errors Fed-64 Rafa-41.

Fed hit 21 more winners than Rafa, but had 23 more UFE than Rafa.

Now, don't tell me that Rafa won the match and after all the objective is to win the match. We all know that. We are talking about hitting winners here.

You are damn correct that I will tell you Rafa won the match..They played over 4 1/2 hours.. Probably one of the most offensive players I have ever seen was Gonzo and presently Verdasco..how many slam have they won playing offensive?
Rafa's defense forced Roger out of his comfort zone which produce the ufes.

Exactly , that's what I'm trying to say, these Roger's fans only like to see the "forced errors" which many of those are obviously forced like we have seen many times and the players have talked about it many times too

 

[Carol]

Carol posted a clip of a nice point from the match against Dolgopolov which I even said was a nice shot btw and then stated she could post many others from that match. Here's how all this silliness started.
Well, here are the stats. Take your pick from these many winners, Carol. There were 4 (6 if you want to count the 2 aces as winners). A whole 4, yes. Now, please don't go telling us Federer fans we're talking rubbish when we're giving you actual facts. No one is or was trying to cause any argument here, except you. We were merely discussing winners and you clearly didn't even watch that match properly at all when you said you could post many more. You have 3 more to show us and 2 aces :cover

- Dolgopolov's 1st serve % in set 1 was 38%.
- Nadal 1st winner in the match happened in the 9th game, it was an ace.
- Nadal 1st baseline winner in the match happened in the 9th game too, a backhand winner.
- Nadal didn't hit a forehand winner in the entire match. He came close in the 12th game, but Dolgopolov tried a defensive lob, who didn't reach the net, so technically a forced error.
- Nadal won 62 total points, 56 coming from Dolgopolov's errors (32 unforced).
- Nadal had 6 winners in the match - 2 aces, 2 from the backhand, 1 volley, 1 smash). 3 of those winners happened in the 9th game.

Did you see the match? have you seen Dolgo playing live like I saw him before? he is an authentic kamikaze, he doesn't know where he hits the ball but he takes all kind of risk with a lot of speed and if he is lucky and the ball goes inside to the lines of course he can do many winners, the problem is that if his opponent plays well then he forces him to start to do more and more errors, and at the end.....caput!

 

[the AntiPusher]

Isn't the bottom line that there are many ways to greatness? And don't we like it that way? I love Roger's graceful, attacking style but would be bored if everyone tried to be "a Federer." The sport is richer for having a wide variety of players.

THIS

 

[Fiero425]

Isn't the bottom line that there are many ways to greatness? And don't we like it that way? I love Roger's graceful, attacking style but would be bored if everyone tried to be "a Federer." The sport is richer for having a wide variety of players.

THIS

What variety? The game has become totally homogenized; the tech, courts, and players! We have so few pros that depend on volleying! uzzled :nono :dodgy: :cover

 

[Carol]

And to finish the discussion about Nadal-Federer

Clay: Nadal 13-2
HC: Nadal 9-7
Grass: Federer 2-1

GS
AO: Nadal 3-0
RG: Nadal 5-0
Wimbledon: Federer 2-1
USO: they never have played each other

 

[El Dude]

Yes, Carol, we know this. Rafa is "rock" to Roger's "scissors." Of course rock and scissors are equally powerful in the game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, but rock wins the match-up.

 

[El Dude]

Isn't the bottom line that there are many ways to greatness? And don't we like it that way? I love Roger's graceful, attacking style but would be bored if everyone tried to be "a Federer." The sport is richer for having a wide variety of players.

THIS

What variety? The game has become totally homogenized; the tech, courts, and players! We have so few pros that depend on volleying! uzzled :nono :dodgy: :cover

That's one kind of variety and I agree that the volley approach is sorely lacking. But its only one kind of variety.

And don't you agree that Roger and Rafa present quite different styles of play? And that the sport is better for having both?

One of the things I love about tennis is that each new great player is unique in their own way. Some might be closer to each-other than others, but everyone brings their own unique characteristics to the court.

Actually, it might be a way to determine the next great: Who is bringing something new?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Well, I see that you only like to remember his worst matches, I mean when he has played bad. Yesterday I was watching the AO 2009 final (guess against who...:snicker) and he hit an amazing shots, oh! by the way was on HC

Here are the stats from 2009 AO final you are talking about.

Winners Fed-71 Rafa-50
Unforced errors Fed-64 Rafa-41.

Fed hit 21 more winners than Rafa, but had 23 more UFE than Rafa.

Now, don't tell me that Rafa won the match and after all the objective is to win the match. We all know that. We are talking about hitting winners here.

You are damn correct that I will tell you Rafa won the match..They played over 4 1/2 hours.. Probably one of the most offensive players I have ever seen was Gonzo and presently Verdasco..how many slam have they won playing offensive?
Rafa's defense forced Roger out of his comfort zone which produce the ufes.

You are mixing up UFE with FE. Typically forced errors is not an item in the stat. It can be calculated indirectly as "forced errors of player A = total points won by player A - winners of A - unforced errors of B". The 64 mentioned in the stat are unforced errors by Fed.

Rafa won 173 points in that match (which is incidentally one less than 174 of Fed). The break up of that is as follows: 50 winners, 64 UFE by Fed and 59 errors by fed that was forced by Rafa's play.

 

[Carol]

Yes, Carol, we know this. Rafa is "rock" to Roger's "scissors." Of course rock and scissors are equally powerful in the game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, but rock wins the match-up.

For the record, believe me or not, I like Roger and give him a lot of credit but some of his fans......ptttfff :nono :cover