Federer, Nadal, and the question of GOATness in general...

[brokenshoelace]

Nadal plays the most anti-tennis, negative, defeatist, UGLY CHEATING game EVER seen in any SPORT! Yup you read that right and I don't care about you feeling offended about it because it is the truth and the truth is bitter and the truth always wins the day!
I cannot respect either Nadal or his TARDS or his BLIND ENABLERS who have completely and utterly ruined this beautiful game. Tennis would be FAR better without Nadal and his tennis hating tards!

PS: You know what's funny and ironic? Most tennis fans aren't Nadal fans.

Donald, is that you?

 

[DarthFed]

At least I'm no longer in the running for most radical Nadal hater on the board

 

[monfed]

Donald, is that you?

I'm monfed and I'm quite well known on tennis forums. I got banned in the other forums because some dulltard mod didn't like my opinion, I hope the mods here know better.

 

[Carol]

I'm monfed and I'm quite well known on tennis forums. I got banned in the other forums because some dulltard mod didn't like my opinion, I hope the mods here know better.

You are the typical Roger's fanatic that makes the rest of the world to see how many flaws he has and also how stupid and haters most of his fans are, pity

 

[DarthFed]

You are the typical Roger's fanatic that makes the rest of the world to see how many flaws he has and also how stupid and haters most of his fans are, pity

Pot meet kettle

 

[brokenshoelace]

I'm monfed and I'm quite well known on tennis forums. I got banned in the other forums because some dulltard mod didn't like my opinion, I hope the mods here know better.

It's a Witch-hunt. Sad!

 

[Carol]

Pot meet kettle

I said "most" but not everyone, of course you are in the list of those "most" and I'm not a hater but I'm clearly an anti haters like you and that moron

 

[Federberg]

Maybe, if we would have the time to look in detail, we would find that what makes a great player "great" is precisely not how well he can play while on his peak, but how effectively he can survive while playing like shit. Each one in his own way, Fedal are masters on this, and on this particular front, specially on clay, Nadal is ahead of Federer.

now you've got me interested in this thread! Seriously? Let me make sure I understand you correctly because I have a lot of sympathy for the first part of this paragraph of yours. I do believe true greatness is pulling it out even when you're not at your best. But you're actually trying to tell me that Rafa not playing well finds a way to win better than Federer outside of clay? Tosh...

My friend I think you've been seduced by Federer's aesthetics and are not watching his tennis as closely as I would have assumed you were

 

[monfed]

You are the typical Roger's fanatic that makes the rest of the world to see how many flaws he has and also how stupid and haters most of his fans are, pity

And you are the typical Wafa apologist. What a predicament huh?

 

[DarthFed]

I said "most" but not everyone, of course you are in the list of those "most" and I'm not a hater but I'm clearly an anti haters like you and that moron

I'd try to talk sense into you but we know it's mission impossible

 

[Carol]

And you are the typical Wafa apologist. What a predicament huh?

That's all you can say after your continuos and pathetic comments?

 

[Carol]

I'd try to talk sense into you but we know it's mission impossible

What do you mean with 'to talk sense into me', showing one more time your hate? I don't get it

 

[mrzz]

Cut the crap. Nadal 99% of the time always hits less winners than his opponent. He is the definition of anti-tennis and as if that is not bad enough he is also a cheater and a really shameless one at that.

First, even if I get the hyperbole, it is simply not true that Nadal 99%, or a more realistic 51% of the time hits less winners than his opponents. Not true, by a long shot. What could be true is that, when his opponent fires more winners than him, 99% of the time he still finds a way to win (99% on clay, surely much less off-clay). This is called selective memory.

I play tennis too, and a lot. When someone tells me that "oh, I can't play with that guy, he only plays slices. This is not tennis". Do you know what I answer those people? "Cut the crap."

If you cannot deal with a shot, with the fact the guy gets your shots, it is your problem. Find a way to win. Nadal has a safe mode to rely on, good to him. Again, cut the crap. (BTW, that doesn't change the fact he is able to fire winners and passing shots that others CANNOT).

Now, if you are talking about gamesmanship, this is a whole other story. Sometimes he crosses the line, and I agree with that. Specially on the serving time. I have called attention to this numerous times here on the boards.

 

[Denis]

Nadal’s clay game is unbelievable, by far the best player ever on that surface.

I don’t like his antics though.

 

[mrzz]

now you've got me interested in this thread! Seriously? Let me make sure I understand you correctly because I have a lot of sympathy for the first part of this paragraph of yours. I do believe true greatness is pulling it out even when you're not at your best. But you're actually trying to tell me that Rafa not playing well finds a way to win better than Federer outside of clay? Tosh...

My friend I think you've been seduced by Federer's aesthetics and are not watching his tennis as closely as I would have assumed you were

Let us first be clear what we are talking about: the situation where both are playing like shit. I was more focused on clay -- where I am sure there is no discussion.

And, yes, even off-clay I think Nadal escapes more than Federer. The reason is simple: off-clay, Nadal plays badly more often than Federer (and his C- game is worst than Federer's C- game off-clay). See, I am not talking about raising the level when the moment comes (and against the field Federer is a killer on this). I am talking about survival when things do not click. Of course Federer did that a lot, he got to the final of Toronto last year like that. But he, at least if you look at his career as a whole, he is much less strategy obedient than Nadal. Federer (on average) will try to raise his level, go for the winner, try his usual high level stuff. He in general would live by the sword and die by the sword. Lately, ok, he is changing a bit. But, on average, Nadal "respects" much more his own level on the day. There is a reason his detractors are so vocal, and the reason is all the matches Nadal found a way to win playing ugly tennis. Federer, winning or losing, generally is the guy who has more highlights on the match...

But -- and this is the important part -- this does not mean I do not recognize the fact that Federer can play a "smart", or effective game. It is just that I think Nadal is able to do it more.

 

[Federberg]

Let us first be clear what we are talking about: the situation where both are playing like shit. I was more focused on clay -- where I am sure there is no discussion.

And, yes, even off-clay I think Nadal escapes more than Federer. The reason is simple: off-clay, Nadal plays badly more often than Federer (and his C- game is worst than Federer's C- game off-clay). See, I am not talking about raising the level when the moment comes (and against the field Federer is a killer on this). I am talking about survival when things do not click. Of course Federer did that a lot, he got to the final of Toronto last year like that. But he, at least if you look at his career as a whole, he is much less strategy obedient than Nadal. Federer (on average) will try to raise his level, go for the winner, try his usual high level stuff. He in general would live by the sword and die by the sword. Lately, ok, he is changing a bit. But, on average, Nadal "respects" much more his own level on the day. There is a reason his detractors are so vocal, and the reason is all the matches Nadal found a way to win playing ugly tennis. Federer, winning or losing, generally is the guy who has more highlights on the match...

But -- and this is the important part -- this does not mean I do not recognize the fact that Federer can play a "smart", or effective game. It is just that I think Nadal is able to do it more.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Implied in your viewpoint is the assumption that Federer has fewer off days than Rafa. I think it's the complete opposite. Rafa is able to maintain a higher level consistently than Roger because he takes much fewer risks than him. He forces the opposition to try to reach his level or sometimes to maintain their high level to overcome him. I have seen Roger play like a dog so many times and get away with it. The entire narrative about Federer being lucky is built around this fact. One of the most impressive things I've ever seen was Roger beating Roddick in 09 for example. He was awful that day. Couldn't hit a backhand to save his live and resorted to dump slices to keep in rallies. He escaped that match by serving out of a tree. The idea that a guy who went 3 years only losing 15 matches (a big part of that was the red dirt and the clay monster) doesn't find solutions to off days better than anyone playing right now is just wrong to me. People are too influenced by his aesthetics, and miss the fact that he's had some truly terrible days where he's found solutions to survive

 

[brokenshoelace]

I don't know, I thought it was common belief that Nadal finds ways to win despite not being at his best well better than just about anyone. I think it's due to the fact that he beats himself less than other players (ie fewer errors), has probably the highest tennis IQ out there (so he's able to adjust better than most), and can resort to extreme defense and frustrate the opponent. He's also more opportunistic than most and knows when to strike.

Of course this doesn't mean others don't do it too. You don't win 20 slams because you've played your best every day. But it seems to me Rafa's game, mental toughness and IQ all combine to allow him to win even when he has an off day. I still don't understand how he beat Verdasco in 2009 for example.

 

[mrzz]

We'll have to agree to disagree. Implied in your viewpoint is the assumption that Federer has fewer off days than Rafa. I think it's the complete opposite. Rafa is able to maintain a higher level consistently than Roger because he takes much fewer risks than him. He forces the opposition to try to reach his level or sometimes to maintain their high level to overcome him. I have seen Roger play like a dog so many times and get away with it. The entire narrative about Federer being lucky is built around this fact. One of the most impressive things I've ever seen was Roger beating Roddick in 09 for example. He was awful that day. Couldn't hit a backhand to save his live and resorted to dump slices to keep in rallies. He escaped that match by serving out of a tree. The idea that a guy who went 3 years only losing 15 matches (a big part of that was the red dirt and the clay monster) doesn't find solutions to off days better than anyone playing right now is just wrong to me. People are too influenced by his aesthetics, and miss the fact that he's had some truly terrible days where he's found solutions to survive

See Broken's post bellow. I am not saying Federer cannot win playing bad. It does not need to be 100 to 0. Is 100 to 96.

And the number of off-days is debatable, yes. I meant REALLY off, not a somewhat off. Somewhat off, sure, Federer has more days like that. But I meant rock bottom.

 

[Federberg]

I don't know, I thought it was common belief that Nadal finds ways to win despite not being at his best well better than just about anyone. I think it's due to the fact that he beats himself less than other players (ie fewer players), has probably the highest tennis IQ out there (so he's able to adjust better than most), and can resort to extreme defense and frustrate the opponent. He's also more opportunistic than most and knows when to strike.

Of course this doesn't mean others don't do it too. You don't win 20 slams because you've played your best every day. But it seems to me Rafa's game, mental toughness and IQ all combine to allow him to win even when he has an off day. I still don't understand how he beat Verdasco in 2009 for example.

I agree that Rafa is able to do this as well. This is a function of greatness. What I reject is the idea that Federer doesn't do it at least as well. It makes absolutely no sense to me. On the one hand you have one player who plays the most high risk tennis we've ever seen and on the other we have a player who plays the percentages better than anyone I've ever seen. The idea that the one who plays the percentages has more off days than the high risk player is simply wrong on it's face. Just think about it for one minute. Rafa is an absolute demon at finding the weak spot of the opposition but you don't really see him making really bad shots in volume or seeing some aspect of his game break down. That's what happens with Federer and despite this he's been able to win a ridiculous amount of matches. That tells you something. This is a guy who despite horrendous down days still finds a way to win. I repeat, I also believe Rafa is an all timer in this category. My objection is less about diminishing Rafa's ability in this regard, it's more about pointing out that Roger has to do it at least as well as him because his game is inherently less stable than Rafa's. People just get deluded by his style and they miss the grit that underlies his play

 

[monfed]

First, even if I get the hyperbole, it is simply not true that Nadal 99%, or a more realistic 51% of the time hits less winners than his opponents. Not true, by a long shot. What could be true is that, when his opponent fires more winners than him, 99% of the time he still finds a way to win (99% on clay, surely much less off-clay). This is called selective memory.

I play tennis too, and a lot. When someone tells me that "oh, I can't play with that guy, he only plays slices. This is not tennis". Do you know what I answer those people? "Cut the crap."

If you cannot deal with a shot, with the fact the guy gets your shots, it is your problem. Find a way to win. Nadal has a safe mode to rely on, good to him. Again, cut the crap. (BTW, that doesn't change the fact he is able to fire winners and passing shots that others CANNOT).

Now, if you are talking about gamesmanship, this is a whole other story. Sometimes he crosses the line, and I agree with that. Specially on the serving time. I have called attention to this numerous times here on the boards.

51% of the time. You call my numbers a hyperbole and yet you dropped a number from the sky didn't you? Here's a fact, dull played freaking Simon on CLAY in ROME and STILL had less winners than him, infact the gap was hilariously big, somebody can pull up those stats from wiki. So even on his beloved clay, he is such a COWARD that he just sits back and waits for his opponents to implode with his abnormal topspin( that level of topspin should be banned in the first place a long time ago but that is a debate for another topic). This kindof NEGATIVE, ANTI-TENNIS should've been nipped in the bud a LONG time ago but the exact opposite happened which is a disgrace to tennis. Clearly the guy who runs the show doesn't understand or care about the welfare of tennis.

As far as his gamesmanship goes, you are simply inaccurate. Nadal on AVERAGE is 30 seconds between points and that's even AFTER the time limit was increased from 20 to 25. He also goes well into the 40 sec range on big points like BPs, 15-30, etc. And let's be honest, he does that not to adjust his shorts, it is to unsettle his opponent. Look Nadal is such a dirty player that his actions say it all.

Why is tennis and the ATP bending over backwards to meet every demand of this farcical moonballer? The answer is clear - For money. Nothing else. The ATP ought to be ashamed of themselves but who is going to teach these morally bankrupt conmen any ethics? Finally money talks bullshit walks.