If Nadal had somehow pulled it out today.....

[calitennis127]

like he did against Petzschner and Haase in 2010, and then he went on to win the tournament after the court got chewed up and the best players got upset, everyone would be talking about his forehand being as good as Federer's, or some kind of sublime shot in tennis history.

Isn't that bothersome to those who prefer rationality over in-the-moment zealotry?

 

[Front242]

Well he seems to have given up on the MTOs so he had no chance

 

[calitennis127]

Well he seems to have given up on the MTOs so he had no chance

No Front, he won all of the biggest matches in Slams because his forehand was that amazing. Haven't you been informed on this topic?

 

[Kieran]

Let's scan this one, buddy, before I go asleep: is this a thread about Rafa's forehand?

Because your intro to the topic is incoherent and a little bit demented: anybody with eyes can see that the one shot he's skewing all over the place like a clumsy child spilling his milk, is the forehand. It's actually embarrassing to watch. He's stepping up to hit easy ones, and banging them two yards wide. It's off at the mo: are you now going to take this lousy version of his forehand and hold it up as an example of his best?

Is that what this thread is? I think we should be told. Before I go asleep, like...

 

[Fiero425]

like he did against Petzschner and Haase in 2010, and then he went on to win the tournament after the court got chewed up and the best players got upset, everyone would be talking about his forehand being as good as Federer's, or some kind of sublime shot in tennis history.

Isn't that bothersome to those who prefer rationality over in-the-moment zealotry?

I've watched Federer for over 10 years; any single stroke is the last thing I think of when his name comes up! It's his overall bearing and tactical way of playing you have to relish, want to emulate, and see over and over! He had a good forehand, but IMO, he wouldn't be in my top 5 of any one shot OTTH! Forehand goes to Borg, Nadal, Sampras, and a couple others! Backhand is Borg again, Agassi, Connors, Vilas! Serve to Sampras, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker! Volleying to Edberg, McEnroe, Nastase! May come back to update! Just off the top of my head! Anybody else? :nono

Update: Return of serve: Djokovic, Agassi, Connors ...

 

[calitennis127]

Let's scan this one, buddy, before I go asleep: is this a thread about Rafa's forehand?

Because your intro to the topic is incoherent and a little bit demented: anybody with eyes can see that the one shot he's skewing all over the place like a clumsy child spilling his milk, is the forehand. It's actually embarrassing to watch. He's stepping up to hit easy ones, and banging them two yards wide. It's off at the mo: are you now going to take this lousy version of his forehand and hold it up as an example of his best?

Is that what this thread is? I think we should be told. Before I go asleep, like...

What I am making a point of is that Nadal's forehand has never been the primary or main reason for why he has won the defining matches in his career, and it also does not belong in the same class as Federer's. The forehand of Federer has had better moments than others, but it never has been as stale and limited as Nadal's has often been.

 

[Kieran]

Let's scan this one, buddy, before I go asleep: is this a thread about Rafa's forehand?

Because your intro to the topic is incoherent and a little bit demented: anybody with eyes can see that the one shot he's skewing all over the place like a clumsy child spilling his milk, is the forehand. It's actually embarrassing to watch. He's stepping up to hit easy ones, and banging them two yards wide. It's off at the mo: are you now going to take this lousy version of his forehand and hold it up as an example of his best?

Is that what this thread is? I think we should be told. Before I go asleep, like...

What I am making a point of is that Nadal's forehand has never been the primary or main reason for why he has won the defining matches in his career, and it also does not belong in the same class as Federer's. The forehand of Federer has had better moments than others, but it never has been as stale and limited as Nadal's has often been.

Of course, buddy...

 

[calitennis127]

Let's scan this one, buddy, before I go asleep: is this a thread about Rafa's forehand?

Because your intro to the topic is incoherent and a little bit demented: anybody with eyes can see that the one shot he's skewing all over the place like a clumsy child spilling his milk, is the forehand. It's actually embarrassing to watch. He's stepping up to hit easy ones, and banging them two yards wide. It's off at the mo: are you now going to take this lousy version of his forehand and hold it up as an example of his best?

Is that what this thread is? I think we should be told. Before I go asleep, like...

What I am making a point of is that Nadal's forehand has never been the primary or main reason for why he has won the defining matches in his career, and it also does not belong in the same class as Federer's. The forehand of Federer has had better moments than others, but it never has been as stale and limited as Nadal's has often been.

Of course, buddy...

Totally agree.

 

[brokenshoelace]

like he did against Petzschner and Haase in 2010, and then he went on to win the tournament after the court got chewed up and the best players got upset, everyone would be talking about his forehand being as good as Federer's, or some kind of sublime shot in tennis history.

Isn't that bothersome to those who prefer rationality over in-the-moment zealotry?

What was Rafa's record that year heading into the Wimbledon 2010?

Do the math and you'll determine how it's not the same as the current washed up Nadal.

I'm sure he's losing this year because his forehand has never been good, and not at all because he's past his prime.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Also this thread is assuming a lot because there was no way Nadal was ever winning this tournament. But, if somehow he had, as this thread suggested, then his forehand catching fire would have been one of the reasons.

This is such a stupid talking point, there is no way anyone can win Wimbledon with defensive tennis, stamina, or whatever. You really didn't think Nadal's forehand was the main reasons he won the tournament in 2008 and 2010? What was?