Does any player every play at his highest level? Ever?!

[Denis]

Really surprised nobody has brought up Rome 2011. Clearly demonstrates that Djokovic is the superior player to Nadal if they both play at their very best. It was after this match that Nadal started severely doubting himself as he knew he was going to get his ass kicked at RG. Unfortunately, the Fedster helped Rafa there.

....

Lame excuses about Rafa being mentally injured in that match by Rafa fans will probably follow now.

Out of curiosity, is this a deliberate trolling attempt or are you really that much of a Djokovic apologist?

If "Djokovic is the superior player to Nadal if they both play a their very best," can you answer two questions?

1. Why is the career matchup 22-17, Nadal?
2. Why is Djokovic only 3-6 against Nadal in their last 9 matches?

Now Novak has wont the last two matches against Rafa, but they were on hard-court. And please don't tell me its a "matchup problem" as Novak, unlike Roger, has proven he can get around the Rafa Onslaught.

I personally think its clear that Novak has the edge on hard-courts, Rafa on clay, and its a toss-up on grass. Here's the break-down:

hard: Novak, 13-7
clay: Rafa, 13-3
grass: Rafa, 2-1

Or am I just feeding the troll?

No, you're either not a careful reader or twisting my argument. This is not about averages or statistics even. It's about two players playing at their highest possible level. Rome 2011. Take a look at the video.

 

[Front242]

Problem here is the Nadal fans will say that wasn't his highest level since he lost and likewise when Nadal beat Djokovic the following year in Rome the opposite will be claimed. It's a pointless debate really.

 

[DarthFed]

Anyway, to stay on topic, they were great matches by Nole and on clay, he gained a huge insight when he drove Rafa to the brink in the semis of Madrid 2009. If anything, that match was even more heroic than the 2011 matches because he was driving into unmarked territory...

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

 

[Front242]

Further to that, some people tend to think along the lines of how can a player have played their best since they lost? Easy. Some people's best is better than others. Everyone has a limit. Of course the way your opponent happens to be playing on a certain day may well mean you haven't been allowed to play your best and that happens very often obviously.

 

[Kieran]

Anyway, to stay on topic, they were great matches by Nole and on clay, he gained a huge insight when he drove Rafa to the brink in the semis of Madrid 2009. If anything, that match was even more heroic than the 2011 matches because he was driving into unmarked territory...

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

 

[Denis]

Problem here is the Nadal fans will say that wasn't his highest level since he lost and likewise when Nadal beat Djokovic the following year in Rome the opposite will be claimed. It's a pointless debate really.

True. But I thought that was the point. In 2011 Rome, I really saw nothing below what I saw Nadal do in the 2008 RG final or equivalent matches. He was just outplayed. Moonballs? Nadal always plays moonballs, just crazy ferocious deadly spinning moonballs.

Btw, in no way am I claiming that Djokovic is a better clay court player, or player in general even, than Nadal. I think the answer to that is rather obvious.

 

[Front242]

Anyway, to stay on topic, they were great matches by Nole and on clay, he gained a huge insight when he drove Rafa to the brink in the semis of Madrid 2009. If anything, that match was even more heroic than the 2011 matches because he was driving into unmarked territory...

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

:snigger Looking forward to seeing that actually but probably wait for the bluray and not bother going to the cinema. Meant to be nice and violent

 

[DarthFed]

Anyway, to stay on topic, they were great matches by Nole and on clay, he gained a huge insight when he drove Rafa to the brink in the semis of Madrid 2009. If anything, that match was even more heroic than the 2011 matches because he was driving into unmarked territory...

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

I'm afraid the sequel doesn't do much to honor bold Leonidas and his 300 :nono Not terrible but a pretty big drop from the 1st one.

 

[DarthFed]

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

:snigger Looking forward to seeing that actually but probably wait for the bluray and not bother going to the cinema. Meant to be nice and violent

Good choice...

 

[Front242]

Yeah, heard it's nowhere near as good. The trend with most sequels although there are a few exceptions obviously. I liked Blade 2 as much as the first one personally.

 

[Kieran]

Losing is never more heroic than winning. And that was the year where Rafa gets a pass at RG (2 weeks after Madrid) because he was crippled with the knee injury...remember :idea:

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

I'm afraid the sequel doesn't do much to honor bold Leonidas and his 300 :nono Not terrible but a pretty big drop from the 1st one.

Ah don't say that, is it?

I'm going on Monday. How's the 3d?

 

[El Dude]

No, you're either not a careful reader or twisting my argument. This is not about averages or statistics even. It's about two players playing at their highest possible level. Rome 2011. Take a look at the video.

But if you're talking about one match, all you're doing is, well, talking about one match. I don't think one match can equate with "highest possible level" in any meaningful way, otherwise we venture into Cali territory ("For that one point, David Nalbandian was the best player in the history of tennis").

All you're saying is that Novak out-played Rafa for one match in which they both played very well. I don't think one match is enough to say that Novak is better than Rafa at their highest possible levels.

 

[DarthFed]

Yeah, heard it's nowhere near as good. The trend with most sequels although there are a few exceptions obviously. I liked Blade 2 as much as the first one personally.

Yeah, sequels are not as good but I'd say this is a farther drop off than most.

 

[DarthFed]

Well, I'm not one to make excuses.

Losing is never more heroic than winning? Tell that to Leonidas and the 300...

I'd say they won that battle even if they lost their lives. No one wins in war anyways. The only "prize" is you might still be alive in the game we call life.

They lost the battle - but they won a sequel, now showing in your local IMAX! :snigger

I'm afraid the sequel doesn't do much to honor bold Leonidas and his 300 :nono Not terrible but a pretty big drop from the 1st one.

Ah don't say that, is it?

I'm going on Monday. How's the 3d?

The 3d is pretty good and I didn't see it in an IMAX. It is entertaining enough, good fight scenes but the lead guy is not as captivating as Leonidas and there isn't as much substance all around.

 

[El Dude]

Yeah, heard it's nowhere near as good. The trend with most sequels although there are a few exceptions obviously. I liked Blade 2 as much as the first one personally.

Yeah, sequels are not as good but I'd say this is a farther drop off than most.

Some sequels that (I think) are better than the first:

X-Men 2
Empire Strikes Back
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Thor: The Dark World

Some argue that the Godfather 2 was better, but I still like the original best.

Those are all big-budget, action scifi type movies. I honestly can't think of any/many sequels that aren't in that vein - but I guess that's just the type of movies they make sequels from.

 

[Kieran]

Terminator 2 is the daddy of all great sequels. French Connection 2. The Lord of the Rings films...

 

[Front242]

^ Yup Agree on those too. Now if we were to compile not only a list of which sequels were not only worse, but plain puke inducing that would be fun While Robocop 2 was OK, wtf was Robocop 3?! Hear the new one isn't bad as kiddie flicks go. Shame they didn't have a director with balls enough to add some violence. The idea of a big metal cyborg cop killing people with no blood is just dumb. :nono

 

[Front242]

As much as T2 was a cool special effects extravanganza and a cool film, I still prefer the first one. I like Arnie better as a bad guy I guess.

 

[Kieran]

^ Yup Agree on those too. Now if we were to compile not only a list of which sequels were not only worse, but plain puke inducing that would be fun While Robocop 2 was OK, wtf was Robocop 3?! Hear the new one isn't bad as kiddie flicks go. Shame they didn't have a director with balls enough to add some violence. The idea of a big metal cyborg cop killing people with no blood is just dumb. :nono

Exactly. I mean, if you're not gonna see ketchup spattered everywhere, how do we know the so-called injuries aren't just another lame excuse?

 

[Front242]

^ Hey, I'd gladly solve that for you with a chainsaw if I could