I'm not sure it would work on clay either. The court speed would probably allow Rafa to grind him down. Personally I'm done watching Roger getting tuned by Rafa on clay. That shit is old
Nah.. at this point I just want Roger to rack up on Wimbledon's and this USO shite has to stop. If my boy can win 3 slams this year I'll be happy and willing to let it go at that (I can't guarantee I'll feel the same way next January of course
)
(Good one about DY. :lulz2Anytime any player builds a streak of any kind, it puts a mental pressure (Even Donald Young was afraid he may win a match when he was building up a long streak of losses:lulz2
Let's say he was maybe a bit "spent." Plus, he was in a final v. Federer, who got the better of him. It's not an excuse for the loss. We were talking about the bagel, and folks were giving the bigger picture of what was going on at the time.
As you say, it's a very superficial argument. I'll respect your preference to stay out of the PED discussion, but I'll just ask you to think about this, which I ask Darth and Front and they never have a good response: he's always played like that, looked like this, and was having great wins from 16, a Major at 19, so when would he have started and why? Just food for thought.I stay well out of PED discussions. I simply don't feel comfortable without facts. I do think that there's some dodgy stuff with respect to transparency when players are caught. That said I believe that Federer and Nadal are so good that there doesn't have to be any performance enhancements. Superficially it would seem that Rafa's athletic style opens him up to accusations about PEDs, whereas any reasonable observation about how Roger wins his matches makes it less likely. But I consider all of that irrelevant without facts. If I went down that road I could well loathe Rafa with the same passion DF does. It's not worth my emotional energy!
ThisIt looks to me that you are now claiming it is not an excuse for the loss, but is an excuse for the bagel.
The RG breadstick happened in the first set. Of course, Rafa righted the ship and won the next three. But, the point that me and Federberg were trying to make is that Rafa can indeed have stretches of bad play even on clay that is not attributable to injury/tiredness.
That’s my fundamental problem with the accusation. I agree with you. Btw it’s also why I’m suspicious of Flo jo but not Usain Bolt. Consistency is a great defenceAs you say, it's a very superficial argument. I'll respect your preference to stay out of the PED discussion, but I'll just ask you to think about this, which I ask Darth and Front and they never have a good response: he's always played like that, looked like this, and was having great wins from 16, a Major at 19, so when would he have started and why? Just food for thought.
It's not an "excuse" for a bagel. It's a "context" for a bagel. There's a difference.It looks to me that you are now claiming it is not an excuse for the loss, but is an excuse for the bagel.
The RG breadstick happened in the first set. Of course, Rafa righted the ship and won the next three. But, the point that me and Federberg were trying to make is that Rafa can indeed have stretches of bad play even on clay that is not attributable to injury/tiredness.
As for the 1-6, I've said he was playing Roger Federer (re: Hamburg...same applies,) who you claim as GOAT, so that would have something to do with it. No one has said that Rafa can't have a bad patch on clay. (See set#2 today.) However, as you say, he more often rights the ship. He's superior on clay to every other player on tour, and he has the focus, patience and belief for clay. But everyone has off-days, even Roger, occasionally on grass. Even when they win in the end, sometimes it's less convincing.
I have a friend-of-a-friend in sports medicine. She says it's the spike in level that gives it away. As you say, consistency is a great defense.
You have no manners at all. I don't support Nadal or Federer for your information. I'm a patriotic Brit. I may not be as clued up as everyone else on tennis but that doesn't make me dull. I know more about other things. You do get monomaniacs you know. Lol. Although I'm not as clued up as everyone else on tennis but I find some of your remarks ridiculous. I just laugh at them. You have a big attitude problem & you're very immature. Is name-calling & typing rubbish all you know how to do?
Since you're so clever you should know but as you don't I'll have to define monomaniac. A monomaniac is someone who doesn't know much about 1 subject. It comes from the terms mono meaning 1 & maniac meaning someone who is mad so putting it together it means someone who is mad or doesn't know much if anything about 1 subject.
