Draw now wide open for Federer to reel in #18....

[ftan]

Long ways to go but this is a huge match to determine how Roger will do this year. He as well as Rafa and Murray know that the final is a virtual bye so they will have to kill themselves the next 2 rounds. Roger beating Tsonga was great and it was an awesome performance but this one is much more telling. He wants to prove he can still compete for slams, he has to win tonight.

If Roger beats Tsonga, Murray, Rafa, and Wawrinka/Berdych, it will have been one of the greatest accomplishments of his career, especially considering he's 32.

Amen !!

 

[calitennis127]

You're also a major idiot for equating an attitude tennis players need to adopt to insignificant posting on message boards. What a terrible analogy.

Actually, it's the same competitive mindset. So it's not a terrible analogy at all. It is completely on point.

And you're a completely out of your mind if you think I cared enough to chase Nadal2005 away. I don't have this sort of authority here buddy.

That's not the point. As always, you are being entirely and annoyingly petty - more and more it is becoming your defining characteristic.

I did not mean that you literally banned Nadal2005 or requested that he/she be banned. What I meant was that no one responded more to that poster and seemed more keen on engaging them, yet you are the first to cry "troll" when someone dishes out some slight at your precious Rafa.

I do love the random level of irritation in your posts though. Almost as much as I love your vast knowledge of Francophone culture.

Oh yeah....you demonstrated serious knowledge of it by listing a bunch of soccer players and bringing up the environment in Marseilles. Thanks for sharing all that knowledge.

Thanks also for completely ignoring an argument you couldn't respond to - namely, that I ascribe general qualities to players from all nations. I gave a pretty thorough breakdown of how American players reflect the environment they come from, and you had nothing to say, of course. Your timid and cliche-ridden mind can't deal with that kind of thorough analysis.

 

[calitennis127]

Well I would have agreed with you..but there is this bloke called 'Rafael Nadal' he has to deal with first

& a Tennis Player called Andy Murray

Murray is the toughest opponent remaining when you strictly go by talent. If he gets by Murray, then he'll have to play very poorly to lose either of his two remaining matches.

That's all I was saying.

That's completely irrelevant. Let's assume for argument's sake, that Murray is the most talented guy remaining in the draw, he still wouldn't be Roger's toughest match remaining because history showed us otherwise. Nadal is the toughest opponent Federer ever had to face in his entire career in the sense that "he had the toughest time beating Nadal" out of all the players he ever played against. Is that debatable? That's based on facts. Wouldn't you say?

So, given that the goal of a tennis match is to win, and given that this thread is discussing the notion of Fed winning his 18th slam, it's reasonable to assume that WINNING is an important factor here, and not measuring talent. Therefore, given that there's one guy remaining in the draw who has beaten Federer 22 times, it's reasonable to assume he's the toughest guy remaining because he's the guy Federer has the toughest time beating, be it for strategic reasons, playing "very poorly," luck, injuries, miracles, divine interventions, or what have you...

Well, considering that the Australian Open - to my knowledge - is not being played on clay this year, and that Federer has, I believe, an 8-8 record against Nadal off of clay, with most of those losses being breakdowns on his end more than anything else, I see the conditions as naturally favorable to him more than Nadal.

I also have a totally different perspective of his series with Nadal than you, as I see many of his losses as inexcusable and woeful (which they were). If he comes out and plays well, he is clearly the better hardcourt player. He has to play very poorly to lose against him. Yes, he has done that many times, but I still see him as Roger Federer first, before I see him as the guy who has some awful/inexcusable losses to Nadal. I view him positively in that way before I see the ugly deficiency of his Nadal series. Thus, with his main shotmaking competitor now out of the draw, I see the road as pretty straightforward if he can get by his tough match with Murray later this evening.

 

[House]

I don't have much hope that #18 will come here, but I am encouraged that #18 is still possible.

Understanding it was just one match, but it was the best I've seen Fed play, from start to finish, in a looooooooooong time.

I'm circling Wimbledon, and hoping he can get his ranking up by then.

 

[isabelle]

All he has to do is beat Murray and then play two solid matches after that, and he's got it. Clearly the toughest obstacle at this tournament for him has just been removed with Djokovic falling to Wawrinka.

Are all you fellow Federer fans as excited as I am by this opportunity?:clap

All he has to do is beat Nadal...very easy especially after a long match vs Murray...

 

[kskate2]

I don't have much hope that #18 will come here, but I am encouraged that #18 is still possible.

Understanding it was just one match, but it was the best I've seen Fed play, from start to finish, in a looooooooooong time.

I'm circling Wimbledon, and hoping he can get his ranking up by then.

Hey House. Good to see you around. Don't be a stranger and visit more often.

 

[Moxie]

Well I would have agreed with you..but there is this bloke called 'Rafael Nadal' he has to deal with first

& a Tennis Player called Andy Murray

Murray is the toughest opponent remaining when you strictly go by talent. If he gets by Murray, then he'll have to play very poorly to lose either of his two remaining matches.

That's all I was saying.

That's completely irrelevant. Let's assume for argument's sake, that Murray is the most talented guy remaining in the draw, he still wouldn't be Roger's toughest match remaining because history showed us otherwise. Nadal is the toughest opponent Federer ever had to face in his entire career in the sense that "he had the toughest time beating Nadal" out of all the players he ever played against. Is that debatable? That's based on facts. Wouldn't you say?

So, given that the goal of a tennis match is to win, and given that this thread is discussing the notion of Fed winning his 18th slam, it's reasonable to assume that WINNING is an important factor here, and not measuring talent. Therefore, given that there's one guy remaining in the draw who has beaten Federer 22 times, it's reasonable to assume he's the toughest guy remaining because he's the guy Federer has the toughest time beating, be it for strategic reasons, playing "very poorly," luck, injuries, miracles, divine interventions, or what have you...

Well, considering that the Australian Open - to my knowledge - is not being played on clay this year, and that Federer has, I believe, an 8-8 record against Nadal off of clay, with most of those losses being breakdowns on his end more than anything else, I see the conditions as naturally favorable to him more than Nadal.

I also have a totally different perspective of his series with Nadal than you, as I see many of his losses as inexcusable and woeful (which they were). If he comes out and plays well, he is clearly the better hardcourt player. He has to play very poorly to lose against him. Yes, he has done that many times, but I still see him as Roger Federer first, before I see him as the guy who has some awful/inexcusable losses to Nadal. I view him positively in that way before I see the ugly deficiency of his Nadal series. Thus, with his main shotmaking competitor now out of the draw, I see the road as pretty straightforward if he can get by his tough match with Murray later this evening.

Roger actually had a 8-9 record v. Nadal off-clay, (6-8 on HCs) until yesterday. (But, aside from getting the count wrong, you sneakily kept in grass, while exerpting clay.) Now 6-9 on HCs.

Turns out, the man you were trying to extricate from the conversation prevailed, anyway. You keep trying to make Nadal a non-issue, or some accidental champion, due to the failings of others. Which, at this point, is beyond ridiculous.