Bet-At-Home Open Hamburg

[Front242]

 

[the AntiPusher]

Nadal playing at 70% can beat Fog perfectly well like always he has done before and losing when he plays at 40% like he did the last two times
It seems like with this win he has ruined the Sunday/final Fog aspirations and also some around here....

Sorry, don't agree at all. You have to factor in how well the opponent plays too and also try and understand there are two players out there and not just one. Fognini has the blueprint for beating Nadal down to a tee and is playing the same game Djokovic uses against him, it's just that Djokovic is far more consistent.

Oh sweet god no.

No. Just no.

Can a pastor get a " Amen" from the congregation:angel:

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

I did not watch much of this tourney. Talking of racquets can someone tell me as to whether Rafa is using the new racquet (that which he told as giving him "more power and less control") or sticking to the old racquet. Recall that he used the new racquet in Monte-Carlo and/or Barcelona and then after seeing bad results he switched back to his old racquet.

Nobody answered my question and so I am repeating it.

he's still with his old wand..back with old trusty. he might revisit that issue in close season.

 

[lacatch]

The jury is out on UFE's. I'm not convinced they even exist but I heard there were a few of them in Area 51. Most of the time players miss "easy shots" for a reason. Rafa had a famous backhand UFE against Nole in Oz in 2012. In this case, anybody here believe the "U" part of this acronym? :nono

Good win for Rafa, regardless of how some people are unhappy about it, or trying to detract. Rafa has had a nightmare 12 months, with injuries, and it's been a slow return to something approaching better form, since he's back. People are gloating too much and too stupidly over his bones. Trust me, fellers, those who laugh last will laugh longest in this case...

The way he's been playing, ANY win for Rafa is a good win. I think many of us feel that the unbridled excitement about Nadal winning a tournament against a bunch of no names is not a huge harbinger of better things to come, especially since we're about to embark on the North American hard court swing and he just won on clay.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Sorry, don't agree at all. You have to factor in how well the opponent plays too and also try and understand there are two players out there and not just one. Fognini has the blueprint for beating Nadal down to a tee and is playing the same game Djokovic uses against him, it's just that Djokovic is far more consistent. But Fognini can beat Nadal even when he's playing far better than 40% as he was today and yet it was still 2 very close sets and in all honesty should've been a 3 set match only for Fog's errors.

Fognini's backhand is ridiculously good when he's playing well and he hits his forehand extremely fast and hard at times as is evident by the number of times he was off balance today as he hit it so hard and fast and Fog is right up there as one of the best movers on tour. Fognini trying to execute drop shots at the wrong time and hitting too many balls long (or into the net mostly) helped Nadal enormously out there too today.

Then explain to me why Nadal has beaten him so many times or are you going to tell me that Fog always has played bad against Nadal (then also against the others ) or maybe we should say that Nadal played AWFUL the last two times he lost against him?
Fog can have the best backhand but to beat to the best ones he needs to have something else "ridiculously good" and then he would have more than '4 titles' or the best ones to play ridiculously bad to lose against him like Rafa did this year :cover uzzled :nono

You need to realize head to heads mean very little. Tell that to Djokovic who has a 19-4 record over Wawrinka but you wouldn't think it after watching this year's Roland Garros final. It's about current form and not historic which only tells a small portion of the story. The problem is you thinking Nadal was playing at 40% when he lost and that he beats Fognini no problem otherwise, forgetting to note how well Fognini may have played. Nadal played very well today and yet it really should've been a 3 set match if Fognini hadn't hit so many errors but it was still extremely close so I suggest throwing that 40% and 70% out the window.

Broken last reply to your post times the factor of 3

 

[Front242]

^ Right so just 'cos a player has always beaten another means they should never lose to that player? Good one. Keep smoking the good stuff and remind yourself of Stan Wawrinka.

 

[Kieran]

The jury is out on UFE's. I'm not convinced they even exist but I heard there were a few of them in Area 51. Most of the time players miss "easy shots" for a reason. Rafa had a famous backhand UFE against Nole in Oz in 2012. In this case, anybody here believe the "U" part of this acronym? :nono

Good win for Rafa, regardless of how some people are unhappy about it, or trying to detract. Rafa has had a nightmare 12 months, with injuries, and it's been a slow return to something approaching better form, since he's back. People are gloating too much and too stupidly over his bones. Trust me, fellers, those who laugh last will laugh longest in this case...

The way he's been playing, ANY win for Rafa is a good win. I think many of us feel that the unbridled excitement about Nadal winning a tournament against a bunch of no names is not a huge harbinger of better things to come, especially since we're about to embark on the North American hard court swing and he just won on clay.

You've been chanting against him for a while, too. Let me get this straight, he done nothing worthwhile this week, right? I mean, we have really inane analysis on this thread today (not from you, I think) saying that FFS has Rafa sussed - but then when Rafa wins, it's no big deal, it's only FFS, it's just a dopey clay event that's worth feck all because the tour is now moved on to hards.

This kind of thinking is missing the point. The point being that Nadal is still working his way back and he hammered Seppi and then dispatched FFS is straights - after suffering two defeats to him earlier in the season on clay. In other words, it's signs of improvement, signs of encouragement. It's positive news, the first bit we've had from since he returned from the injury/appendix timeout.

And for the record, I saw no "unbridled excitement..."

 

[Fiero425]

OMG, just caught the end! That was so ridiculous of Rafa; exalts his win and falls to his knees! IN my 30 odd years of playing and winning tournaments, I never came close to acting that much of a FOOL; him doing it on INT'L TV! I acted like I had been there before I guess! He's either too happy with this meager win or he knows it's close to the end and was surprised he actually beat F3!

 

[Carol]

Sorry, don't agree at all. You have to factor in how well the opponent plays too and also try and understand there are two players out there and not just one. Fognini has the blueprint for beating Nadal down to a tee and is playing the same game Djokovic uses against him, it's just that Djokovic is far more consistent. But Fognini can beat Nadal even when he's playing far better than 40% as he was today and yet it was still 2 very close sets and in all honesty should've been a 3 set match only for Fog's errors.

Fognini's backhand is ridiculously good when he's playing well and he hits his forehand extremely fast and hard at times as is evident by the number of times he was off balance today as he hit it so hard and fast and Fog is right up there as one of the best movers on tour. Fognini trying to execute drop shots at the wrong time and hitting too many balls long (or into the net mostly) helped Nadal enormously out there too today.

Then explain to me why Nadal has beaten him so many times or are you going to tell me that Fog always has played bad against Nadal (then also against the others ) or maybe we should say that Nadal played AWFUL the last two times he lost against him?
Fog can have the best backhand but to beat to the best ones he needs to have something else "ridiculously good" and then he would have more than '4 titles' or the best ones to play ridiculously bad to lose against him like Rafa did this year :cover uzzled :nono

You need to realize head to heads mean very little. Tell that to Djokovic who has a 19-4 record over Wawrinka but you wouldn't think it after watching this year's Roland Garros final. It's about current form and not historic which only tells a small portion of the story. The problem is you thinking Nadal was playing at 40% when he lost and that he beats Fognini no problem otherwise, forgetting to note how well Fognini may have played. Nadal played very well today and yet it really should've been a 3 set match if Fognini hadn't hit so many errors but it was still extremely close so I suggest throwing that 40% and 70% out the window.

Nadal has played well but not 100%, and you know why? because we know the serve is a 50% to win and he still is a 20% to be good so that's in one of the reason that he gives more easy points to his opponents, otherwise it would have been a diferent story and Fog wouldn't been so close so I don't have anything to throw out of the window

 

[Front242]

Then explain to me why Nadal has beaten him so many times or are you going to tell me that Fog always has played bad against Nadal (then also against the others ) or maybe we should say that Nadal played AWFUL the last two times he lost against him?
Fog can have the best backhand but to beat to the best ones he needs to have something else "ridiculously good" and then he would have more than '4 titles' or the best ones to play ridiculously bad to lose against him like Rafa did this year :cover uzzled :nono

You need to realize head to heads mean very little. Tell that to Djokovic who has a 19-4 record over Wawrinka but you wouldn't think it after watching this year's Roland Garros final. It's about current form and not historic which only tells a small portion of the story. The problem is you thinking Nadal was playing at 40% when he lost and that he beats Fognini no problem otherwise, forgetting to note how well Fognini may have played. Nadal played very well today and yet it really should've been a 3 set match if Fognini hadn't hit so many errors but it was still extremely close so I suggest throwing that 40% and 70% out the window.

Nadal has played well but not 100%, and you know why? because we know the serve is a 50% to win and he still is a 20% to be good so that's in one of the reason that he gives more easy points to his opponents, otherwise it would have been a diferent story and Fog wouldn't been so close so I don't have anything to throw out of the window

Besides the 3 double faults I hope you realize he had 80% first serves in which is an extremely good stat. People could also tell you if Fognini hadn't donated 15 games it would've been a different story. Again, 2 people were playing the match and not one and they both determined the outcome. I personally thought Nadal played very well though but was lucky Fognini didn't drag it to a 3rd set. Given Nadal was cramping up at the trophy presentation who knows how a 3rd set might have fared.

 

[Carol]

You need to realize head to heads mean very little. Tell that to Djokovic who has a 19-4 record over Wawrinka but you wouldn't think it after watching this year's Roland Garros final. It's about current form and not historic which only tells a small portion of the story. The problem is you thinking Nadal was playing at 40% when he lost and that he beats Fognini no problem otherwise, forgetting to note how well Fognini may have played. Nadal played very well today and yet it really should've been a 3 set match if Fognini hadn't hit so many errors but it was still extremely close so I suggest throwing that 40% and 70% out the window.

Nadal has played well but not 100%, and you know why? because we know the serve is a 50% to win and he still is a 20% to be good so that's in one of the reason that he gives more easy points to his
opponents, otherwise it would have been a diferent story and Fog wouldn't been so close so I don't have anything to throw out of the window

Besides the 3 double faults I hope you realize he had 80% first serves in which is an extremely good stat. People could also tell you if Fognini hadn't donated 15 games it would've been a different story. Again, 2 people were playing the match and not one and they both determined the outcome. I personally thought Nadal played very well though but was lucky Fognini didn't drag it to a 3rd set. Given Nadal was cramping up at the trophy presentation who knows how a 3rd set might have fared.

Fog has played well many times against the top best players but at the end (same like Berdych) can't finish the good job (maybe they were lucky too) otherwise they would have more titles and I'd surprise if they will unless his opponents would play bad like Rafa did for many months.
And yes, two people are playing and the winner always is the one that plays better

 

[Front242]

Nadal has played well but not 100%, and you know why? because we know the serve is a 50% to win and he still is a 20% to be good so that's in one of the reason that he gives more easy points to his
opponents, otherwise it would have been a diferent story and Fog wouldn't been so close so I don't have anything to throw out of the window

Besides the 3 double faults I hope you realize he had 80% first serves in which is an extremely good stat. People could also tell you if Fognini hadn't donated 15 games it would've been a different story. Again, 2 people were playing the match and not one and they both determined the outcome. I personally thought Nadal played very well though but was lucky Fognini didn't drag it to a 3rd set. Given Nadal was cramping up at the trophy presentation who knows how a 3rd set might have fared.

Fog has played well many times against the top best players but at the end (same like Berdych) can't finish the good job (maybe they were lucky too) otherwise they would have more titles and I'd surprise if they will unless his opponents would play bad like Rafa did for many months.
And yes, two people are playing and the winner always is the one that plays better

I never said Nadal didn't play better. Obviously he did and I already said he played very well today. What I said was I don't agree with your opinion that he was at only 40% when he lost to Fognini the last 2 times because Fognini has some say in the outcome too. A few less errors today (about 30 less lol!) and it would be a different story. Seriously though, even 1 or 2 less errors and that was going to a 3rd set.

 

[Kieran]

Buddy, see this post here? That's your only post all evening that has been worth reading...

 

[Front242]

Buddy, see this post here? That's your only post all evening that has been worth reading...

That was me saying wtf to yours above it

 

[Kieran]

Buddy, see this post here? That's your only post all evening that has been worth reading...

That was me saying wtf to yours above it

Exactly, and it had Clint in it, so even when you're wrong, you know now that you can be wrong and still do something right...

 

[Kieran]

With this win today, Rafa has maintained his record of winning a clay event in Europe for every season since 2004... :clap

 

[Kieran]

Here's "Rafa's PR man" :cover , Macho Man on twitter, there was a bit of a spat between young Ralph and FFS, maybe somebody can translate for us:

https://twitter.com/NachoMuhlenberg/status/627836352952958977

 

[tented]

This thread is about Hamburg.

Fedal posts have been moved to "The Ultimate Fedal Thread" beginning here.

Please post all Fedal messages in that thread.

 

[Moxie]

Here's "Rafa's PR man" :cover , Macho Man on twitter, there was a bit of a spat between young Ralph and FFS, maybe somebody can translate for us:

https://twitter.com/NachoMuhlenberg/status/627836352952958977

I had written you a longer explanation, but it got lost in the housekeeping changeover. Muhlenberg says it was about Toni talking. The snippet makes it hard to understand the subject, only that FFS is complaining that someone always does the same thing, and don't "break my balls." At the head of the clip, Rafa says, "no perdonaba," which could be interpreted as, "I don't excuse him," if Toni is the subject of the dust-up, but it really needs more context. I don't think Fabio does himself any favors with these tirades, and I do think going over to Rafa's side during the changeover is a bit aggressive. You have a chair umpire to arbitrate during the match.

 

[Fiero425]

Here's "Rafa's PR man" :cover , Macho Man on twitter, there was a bit of a spat between young Ralph and FFS, maybe somebody can translate for us:

https://twitter.com/NachoMuhlenberg/status/627836352952958977

I had written you a longer explanation, but it got lost in the housekeeping changeover. Muhlenberg says it was about Toni talking. The snippet makes it hard to understand the subject, only that FFS is complaining that someone always does the same thing, and don't "break my balls." At the head of the clip, Rafa says, "no perdonaba," which could be interpreted as, "I don't excuse him," if Toni is the subject of the dust-up, but it really needs more context. I don't think Fabio does himself any favors with these tirades, and I do think going over to Rafa's side during the changeover is a bit aggressive. You have a chair umpire to arbitrate during the match.

This is why Rafa is on my "ugly" list! He thinks he's above everybody and all the rules! It's hard to believe someone as respected and appreciated as him can be caught up in these "dust ups" periodically because he's still being managed by his uncle as if he's a 15 y.o.! "Grow up Rafa and take care of business on your own! You're supposed to be a grown up now in the twilight of your illustrious career!" :cover uzzled :nono :angel: :dodgy: