Gerry Weber Open (Halle) 9-15 June 2014

[Moxie]

Well, THAT was an amusing walk down Memory Lane! Not just the matches, but the good-ol' Fedal battle. Like Kieran, I don't think folks give Nadal enough credit for his hand in those wins, but some things will never change.

As to Halle, Roger is looking sharp. Except for that hilarious moment that he missed that he'd won the match. (Doh!) Maybe it's harder than we supposed to glide seamlessly from having new twins into coming back to tennis. If you're going to lose the plot, best to do it when the match is actually over, I guess. :laydownlaughing

 

[Front242]

Well you say some things will never change and so do the Federer camp so it's no different. That's the way things go with fans. The thing to do is watch with a fan of neither player or better still someone who detests both and have them unbiasedly say was this about one guy going from great to crap in mere minutes or one guy going from being soundly beaten to playing like Superman and catching back up.

 

[Moxie]

Well you say some things will never change and so do the Federer camp so it's no different. That's the way things go with fans. The thing to do is watch with a fan of neither player or better still someone who detests both and have them unbiasedly say was this about one guy going from great to crap in mere minutes or one guy going from being soundly beaten to playing like Superman and catching back up.

Well, it IS a little different. Nadal fans will reasonably concede that sometimes Roger was just the better, as in WTF. But there are very few matches that Fedfans will say that Nadal won, outright, even given the head to head. There's a lot of contesting point-to-point, even wrongly. (See Darth's argument with Broken and Kieran.) But the bottom-line is that Fedfans think that Roger blew it, time and again, not that Rafa was the better player to win all of those matches. That really looks down your noses at Nadal's tennis.

I don't think there IS a person who despises both, or that there are enough of them to make a quorum. The dispassionate observer will see that Roger mostly lost against Nadal. And he would mostly understand why.

 

[Front242]

That's the thing, the reason why he mostly lost in a number of matches is very much open to interpretation. Nadal needed to do nothing to win set 4 of the RG 2011 final to win it 6-1, Federer was just so damn bad and likewise with the AO '09 final 5th set. Miami 2011 semi final. Federer could hardly keep the ball in the court and we both know he can play a lot better than that but yet all these woeful performances are not all because Nadal played amazing. He didn't need to play amazing (and he didn't) in that final, Federer was just outright diabolical.

 

[Fiero425]

That's the thing, the reason why he mostly lost in a number of matches is very much open to interpretation. Nadal needed to do nothing to win set 4 of the RG 2011 final to win it 6-1, Federer was just so damn bad and likewise with the AO '09 final 5th set. Miami 2011 semi final. Federer could hardly keep the ball in the court and we both know he can play a lot better than that but yet all these woeful performances are not all because Nadal played amazing. He didn't need to play amazing (and he didn't) in that final, Federer was just outright diabolical.

It's hard to call a real rivalry with how unbalanced the contests can be at times! Some of those matches; esp. the FO massacres are unwatchable! I still say Federer is stubborn and won't push it by being more aggressive and cutting off some of those points at the net! He can't lose any worse! It looks like Rafa gives him the matches Roger does win because they don't mean anything to him; WTF, 250's, and some Masters' wins! No match of any consequence; even at Wimbledon have even been close of late!

 

[Front242]

Apart from 2008 none of those RG finals were massacres and for once both camps agree that Federer was plain crap in that 2008 final.

 

[Front242]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

 

[Fiero425]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

 

[Moxie]

That's the thing, the reason why he mostly lost in a number of matches is very much open to interpretation. Nadal needed to do nothing to win set 4 of the RG 2011 final to win it 6-1, Federer was just so damn bad and likewise with the AO '09 final 5th set. Miami 2011 semi final. Federer could hardly keep the ball in the court and we both know he can play a lot better than that but yet all these woeful performances are not all because Nadal played amazing. He didn't need to play amazing (and he didn't) in that final, Federer was just outright diabolical.

"Open to interpretation" is exactly where it all gets muddy. When you say that Nadal "needed to do nothing" to win in certain sets, you give no credit to what he DID do to get himself in those positions. I know you don't mean to cherry-pick Miami 2011, since the Wimbledons of 07 and 08 are so much more compelling. Likewise the 2011 RG…Roger certainly had a chance. And I don't know what to say about the AO 5th set in '09, but either Roger wasn't up to the task, or it was an accumulation of fails against Nadal. In AO '09, it may be that Roger was feeling a bit skunked, and also, the pressure of trying to beat Pete's #14. As to RG 2011, I think it's fair to say that basically no one beats Rafa there, although Roger gave it a good shot that year.

 

[Front242]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

He didn't tank. He just wasn't good enough. He wants to win every tournament he's never won so why the hell would he tank?!

 

[Front242]

That's the thing, the reason why he mostly lost in a number of matches is very much open to interpretation. Nadal needed to do nothing to win set 4 of the RG 2011 final to win it 6-1, Federer was just so damn bad and likewise with the AO '09 final 5th set. Miami 2011 semi final. Federer could hardly keep the ball in the court and we both know he can play a lot better than that but yet all these woeful performances are not all because Nadal played amazing. He didn't need to play amazing (and he didn't) in that final, Federer was just outright diabolical.

"Open to interpretation" is exactly where it all gets muddy. When you say that Nadal "needed to do nothing" to win in certain sets, you give no credit to what he DID do to get himself in those positions. I know you don't mean to cherry-pick Miami 2011, since the Wimbledons of 07 and 08 are so much more compelling. Likewise the 2011 RG…Roger certainly had a chance. And I don't know what to say about the AO 5th set in '09, but either Roger wasn't up to the task, or it was an accumulation of fails against Nadal. In AO '09, it may be that Roger was feeling a bit skunked, and also, the pressure of trying to beat Pete's #14. As to RG 2011, I think it's fair to say that basically no one beats Rafa there, although Roger gave it a good shot that year.

But after winning set 3 to lose 6-1 in set 4 was abysmal and he could barely hit a barn door there, hence me saying Nadal needed to do very little to win there. Watch set 4 of that RG 2011 match again. People already talked at length about the Wimbledon matches but when I see stupid posts from users on tennis.com and elsewhere about the overall h2h you naturally have to cite certain matches where Federer forgot the aim of the game wasn't hitting the ball 15 feet wide or into the net. And to then hear it's all about Nadal annoys the hell out of me when everyone and his wife knows Federer committed a ton of errors in that Miami SF in 2011.

 

[Fiero425]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

He didn't tank. He just wasn't good enough. He wants to win every tournament he's never won so why the hell would he tank?!

Well if he didn't tank, people need to drop the GOAT talk from now on! Sorry! uzzled :nono :angel:

 

[Moxie]

That's the thing, the reason why he mostly lost in a number of matches is very much open to interpretation. Nadal needed to do nothing to win set 4 of the RG 2011 final to win it 6-1, Federer was just so damn bad and likewise with the AO '09 final 5th set. Miami 2011 semi final. Federer could hardly keep the ball in the court and we both know he can play a lot better than that but yet all these woeful performances are not all because Nadal played amazing. He didn't need to play amazing (and he didn't) in that final, Federer was just outright diabolical.

"Open to interpretation" is exactly where it all gets muddy. When you say that Nadal "needed to do nothing" to win in certain sets, you give no credit to what he DID do to get himself in those positions. I know you don't mean to cherry-pick Miami 2011, since the Wimbledons of 07 and 08 are so much more compelling. Likewise the 2011 RG…Roger certainly had a chance. And I don't know what to say about the AO 5th set in '09, but either Roger wasn't up to the task, or it was an accumulation of fails against Nadal. In AO '09, it may be that Roger was feeling a bit skunked, and also, the pressure of trying to beat Pete's #14. As to RG 2011, I think it's fair to say that basically no one beats Rafa there, although Roger gave it a good shot that year.

But after winning set 3 to lose 6-1 in set 4 was abysmal and he could barely hit a barn door there, hence me saying Nadal needed to do very little to win there. Watch set 4 of that RG 2011 match again. People already talked at length about the Wimbledon matches but when I see stupid posts from users on tennis.com and elsewhere about the overall h2h you naturally have to cite certain matches where Federer forgot the aim of the game wasn't hitting the ball 15 feet wide or into the net. And to then hear it's all about Nadal annoys the hell out of me when everyone and his wife knows Federer committed a ton of errors in that Miami SF in 2011.

It annoys the hell out of you that it's about Nadal, at all. But it is. Certainly, Federer committed errors, but you never think about what Nadal did well. Or the "forced error." Nadal being in Roger's wheelhouse forces the error, often as not. But, to be fair, Rafa has played very well against Roger in the a lot of the big moments. They can't all because Roger was a "donkey," as you like to say.

 

[Front242]

^ Sure, Nadal clearly hit some good shots in that match but it was a slop fest from Federer. Check the stats. Who says I never think what Nadal did well? He clearly hits good shots in every match but when you see Federer perfectly construct a point and have the whole court open and not miss the volley by hitting the top inch of the net but the bottom part by the ground then it's hard to say he's playing well to anyone. Anyhow, no point arguing over it 'cos it's frankly a waste of time.

 

[tented]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

He didn't tank. He just wasn't good enough. He wants to win every tournament he's never won so why the hell would he tank?!

Exactly.

The rate at which "tanking" is being mentioned around here lately is stunning, especially in the context of guys like Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, etc. These guys are successful and competitive on a level that I don't think we can even accurately appreciate. Few can.

But one thing is clear: they're not looking to lose. Ever. They want to win every match they play, regardless of factors such as their potential next round opponent.

 

[tented]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

He didn't tank. He just wasn't good enough. He wants to win every tournament he's never won so why the hell would he tank?!

Well if he didn't tank, people need to drop the GOAT talk from now on! Sorry! uzzled :nono :angel:

So, because a player performed poorly in a single tournament, he must be eliminated from GOAT discussions? Is that correct?

 

[Moxie]

^ Sure, Nadal clearly hit some good shots in that match but it was a slop fest from Federer. Check the stats. Who says I never think what Nadal did well? He clearly hits good shots in every match but when you see Federer perfectly construct a point and have the whole court open and not miss the volley by hitting the top inch of the net but the bottom part by the ground then it's hard to say he's playing well to anyone. Anyhow, no point arguing over it 'cos it's frankly a waste of time.

It is indeed a waste of time. You think that all Federer's points are perfectly constructed, and I guess, by extrapolation, that Nadal's are mostly just junk thrown at a master, that sometimes 'happen' to hit. Yes, you admit he hits an occasional good shot, but you mostly think, if Roger lost against Rafa, it's because he should have done better.

On behalf of Nadal, I would prefer to say that it has a lot to do with his own tennis chops.

 

[Front242]

^ Sure, Nadal clearly hit some good shots in that match but it was a slop fest from Federer. Check the stats. Who says I never think what Nadal did well? He clearly hits good shots in every match but when you see Federer perfectly construct a point and have the whole court open and not miss the volley by hitting the top inch of the net but the bottom part by the ground then it's hard to say he's playing well to anyone. Anyhow, no point arguing over it 'cos it's frankly a waste of time.

It is indeed a waste of time. You think that all Federer's points are perfectly constructed, and I guess, by extrapolation, that Nadal's are mostly just junk thrown at a master, that sometimes 'happen' to hit. Yes, you admit he hits an occasional good shot, but you mostly think, if Roger lost against Rafa, it's because he should have done better.

On behalf of Nadal, I would prefer to say that it has a lot to do with his own tennis chops.

I never said Nadal mostly hits junk. I've made it clear earlier today that since basically the debacles of Monte Carlo '08 and RG '08 Federer clearly has a pretty bad mental block against Nadal and misses many routine shots all because he plays like crap against him most of the time. I'm not talking forced errors where he's pushed miles out of court obviously but routine netted forehands and volleys he could normally hit in his sleep and routine shots hit miles wide, not mad flashy attempted winners but complete sitting ducks. Those are the sort of crap errors he produces of his own accord that mount up to his detriment all too often against him.

 

[Fiero425]

Btw, Nadal doesn't give him matches of no consequence. He's proud as hell to be the leader in masters titles and the WTF is a very big tournament that he'd desperately like to win.

I'm sure Nadal would love to win the WTF at least once, but so far he hasn't come close; making a couple finals! I still say he tanked one year, losing all 3 of his RR matches; maybe '09, his so called injury year losing FO match to Soderling! :cry :nono uzzled :angel:

He didn't tank. He just wasn't good enough. He wants to win every tournament he's never won so why the hell would he tank?!

Well if he didn't tank, people need to drop the GOAT talk from now on! Sorry! uzzled :nono :angel:

So, because a player performed poorly in a single tournament, he must be eliminated from GOAT discussions? Is that correct?

Exactly genius! :nono :huh: :nono :angel:

 

[Moxie]

^ Sure, Nadal clearly hit some good shots in that match but it was a slop fest from Federer. Check the stats. Who says I never think what Nadal did well? He clearly hits good shots in every match but when you see Federer perfectly construct a point and have the whole court open and not miss the volley by hitting the top inch of the net but the bottom part by the ground then it's hard to say he's playing well to anyone. Anyhow, no point arguing over it 'cos it's frankly a waste of time.

It is indeed a waste of time. You think that all Federer's points are perfectly constructed, and I guess, by extrapolation, that Nadal's are mostly just junk thrown at a master, that sometimes 'happen' to hit. Yes, you admit he hits an occasional good shot, but you mostly think, if Roger lost against Rafa, it's because he should have done better.

On behalf of Nadal, I would prefer to say that it has a lot to do with his own tennis chops.

I never said Nadal mostly hits junk. I've made it clear earlier today that since basically the debacles of Monte Carlo '08 and RG '08 Federer clearly has a pretty bad mental block against Nadal and misses many routine shots all because he plays like crap against him most of the time. I'm not talking forced errors where he's pushed miles out of court obviously but routine netted forehands and volleys he could normally hit in his sleep and routine shots hit miles wide, not mad flashy attempted winners but complete sitting ducks. Those are the sort of crap errors he produces of his own accord that mount up to his detriment all too often against him.

Again, though, it's all Federer, bottom-line, and nothing to do with Nadal. *sigh*