Is Federer becoming the new Ferrer?

[Front242]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

 

[Kieran]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

 

[Front242]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

I beg to differ! He certainly wasn't great at the start.

 

[Kieran]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

I beg to differ! He certainly wasn't great at the start.

Nobody is, against Rafa at RG. Nole did great and it was a tremendous finale, but it shoulda put in the suitcase and dispatched to the attic after four. Nole did very well to take that one to five (aided by two appalling service games and a tiebreak, by a tentative Rafa in the 4th)...

 

[Front242]

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

I beg to differ! He certainly wasn't great at the start.

Nobody is, against Rafa at RG. Nole did great and it was a tremendous finale, but it shoulda put in the suitcase and dispatched to the attic after four. Nole did very well to take that one to five (aided by two appalling service games and a tiebreak, by a tentative Rafa in the 4th)...

We can say that about so many matches. Fact is, Nadal didn't finish it in the 4th and equally Djokovic didn't finish it in the 5th. And going back to saying Novak had an off day, we both know he shouldn't be losing sets like he did set 3 (6-1) if he's playing even half good, which he wasn't till sets 4 and 5.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

Well, even having an off-day, he won 9-7 in the fifth...

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

I beg to differ! He certainly wasn't great at the start.

So let me get this straight:

Nadal played a great match against Novak on clay, with Novak having a bad day, and it still ended 9-7 in the fifth?

Novak was playing good, with the exception of the 3rd set, and even played excellent for much of the 5th.

So yeah, it wasn't Novak's best performance, but as I keep repeating, if a top player plays his best performance, he wins.

And maybe there's a reason ONE guy has so far been able to play great against Nadal at the FO in NINE YEARS!

 

[brokenshoelace]

No. He lost

Sorry, but Nole taking Rafa to 9-7 in the fifth in Paris is not Nole having an off-day... :nono

I beg to differ! He certainly wasn't great at the start.

Nobody is, against Rafa at RG. Nole did great and it was a tremendous finale, but it shoulda put in the suitcase and dispatched to the attic after four. Nole did very well to take that one to five (aided by two appalling service games and a tiebreak, by a tentative Rafa in the 4th)...

We can say that about so many matches. Fact is, Nadal didn't finish it in the 4th and equally Djokovic didn't finish it in the 5th. And going back to saying Novak had an off day, we both know he shouldn't be losing sets like he did set 3 (6-1) if he's playing even half good, which he wasn't till sets 4 and 5.

So he also wasn't playing half good in set 2, which he won? Good to see that the greatest clay courter we've ever seen can drop a set on clay to someone not even playing half good.

The thing about these nit-picking arguments, they go both ways.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

What does that make of his losses to Nadal at the 2008 FO or 2012 FO then? Where he lost in 3 and 4 sets? Atrocious days?

 

[Front242]

^ Sure, anyone can win a set by a single break playing average tennis. It can be one point on deuce deciding it. A netcord could be the determining factor over the set scoreline rather than good play

 

[Kieran]

It's great the way these threads develop, and I include myself in this. It goes all the way back to Rafa-Djoker again. Makes a change. In the really old days, every thread led back to Fedal... :snigger

 

[brokenshoelace]

^ Sure, anyone can win a set by a single break playing average tennis. It can be one point on deuce deciding it. A netcord could be the determining factor over the set scoreline rather than good play

OK let me repeat this sentence you just said by inserting an important caveat:

Anyone can win a set by a single break against an IN FORM RAFAEL NADAL AT THE FRENCH OPEN playing average tennis.

There, now you know how improbable that suggestion is.

 

[Front242]

^You're lucky he had an off day at RG 2013 so.

What does that make of his losses to Nadal at the 2008 FO or 2012 FO then? Where he lost in 3 and 4 sets? Atrocious days?

I was basically countering the Fed v Novak at Wimbledon nonsense. Fed can definitely beat Novak there and Novak doesn't need to have an off day. We both know Nadal played much better in RG '08 than he did last year and 2012 Novak really wasn't very good till the rain started in set 3. Sure he double faulted away set 1 if I recall and was making lots of poor errors. He also double faulted away the match in 2012 on match point the same way he did in Rome just before it. Hardly atrocious but we've both seen Novak play much better clay matches than RG 2012 besides set 3 and really the rain was aiding his shots in a big way and killing Nadal's topspin stone dead. They probably should've stopped play. 2008 I believe he hadn't really come to his best form on clay though he fared well in set 3. He definitely wasn't in his peak 6 years ago. Nadal on the other hand was playing his best level on clay in 2008 anyway.

 

[Front242]

^ Sure, anyone can win a set by a single break playing average tennis. It can be one point on deuce deciding it. A netcord could be the determining factor over the set scoreline rather than good play

OK let me repeat this sentence you just said by inserting an important caveat:

Anyone can win a set by a single break against an IN FORM RAFAEL NADAL AT THE FRENCH OPEN playing average tennis.

There, now you know how improbable that suggestion is.

Nadal wasn't really that in form the whole tournament though was he besides the semi and final in RG 2013.

 

[Kieran]

We'll see if it's "nonsense". It wasn't nonsense in 2012, but we had a younger Federer who was the current holder of 2 (or was it 3?) MS titles. It remains to be seen if he can regain those levels again with enough consistency to trouble Nole at the slams...

 

[Kieran]

^ Sure, anyone can win a set by a single break playing average tennis. It can be one point on deuce deciding it. A netcord could be the determining factor over the set scoreline rather than good play

OK let me repeat this sentence you just said by inserting an important caveat:

Anyone can win a set by a single break against an IN FORM RAFAEL NADAL AT THE FRENCH OPEN playing average tennis.

There, now you know how improbable that suggestion is.

Nadal wasn't really that in form the whole tournament though was he besides the semi and final in RG 2013.

So, Rafa was "inform" in the final, and Nole was off - and it went to 9-7 in the fifth. Now, you see how improbable THAT suggestion is! :lolz:

 

[Front242]

We'll see if it's "nonsense". It wasn't nonsense in 2012, but we had a younger Federer who was the current holder of 2 (or was it 3?) MS titles. It remains to be seen if he can regain those levels again with enough consistency to trouble Nole at the slams...

Younger? He was still almost 31!

 

[El Dude]

I'll boil it down for everyone:

My favorite player can beat your favorite player, if he's in form. Whenever my favorite player loses to your favorite player it's because of some reason, like injury, age, mental lapse, poor match-up, etc.

There. Now can we move on now?

 

[britbox]

I can't see Roger beating Nole at a slam. But, for instance, if Rafa and Nole fell to the wayside and Roger met Ferrer in the final, well, I guess there's only one man coming out of that one weighing heavier than he did going into it.

But I don't think that's exactly TM's point. I don't read it as him saying that Federer is now "only" as good as Ferrer tennis-wise. I think he's saying that Federer has fallen far enough behind the top 2 as to be more or less considered an also-ran. I think it's harsh, given that everybody gets to that stage eventually, though again, I doubt it was anything more than an observation by TM, and not a criticism...

This is where I fault the rest of the tour! It's more than a little pathetic when you allow the same players to take all major titles; not just most! In the past you had joke "goof" finals due to upsets and that's how some greats acquired such "big mumbers!" Sampras won a few majors that way playing the likes of Pioline, Phillippoussis, or Moya! McEnroe got an easy Wimbledon over Chris Lewis from NZ in '83! It's just sad to see how gutless the rest of the male players have been in this era to "bend over" like this again and again, allowing routine major wins for Federer, Nadal, and Nole! We can give an honorable mention to Murray and Del Po I suppose, but that been 4 events; 2 USO, 1 W, 1 Olympic gold medal! Wawrinka finally broke through like his supporters thought; bout time! He did what I hoped players like Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, Tsonga, or others to do more routinely; never happened though! The upsets few with no majors; not even a final save Soderling twice! Am I being too drama-filled or what? :nono lol! :lolz: :laydownlaughing

I don't buy this argument Fiero buddy... Never have. Players don't "allow" other players to sweep the board. They don't just bend over and hand over the keys to the title. In the great scheme of things they aren't gutless - they just aren't good enough (in relative terms to the uber elite sitting at the top).

Seriously, are we going to have a discussion where we discard every pro tennis player as a feeble and gutless other than 3-5 players at the very top? Most of these pros have had to been tough cookies to even make the pro tour.

The fact of the matter is that there are three, more likely four hall of famers to go through to get a sniff of the titles... Guys who are a cut above the rest of the field. Sure there will be the odd huge upset, but these guys will need two or maybe even three pretty big upsets to take a major title.

Soderling, Ferrer, Gasquet, Tsonga would never be routinely winning major titles. If you add in the 4 or other 5 top dogs then 9 into 1 doesn't go.

 

[Front242]

Don't forget rain, toilet breaks before your opponent serves, night matches make my back ache so I lost, etc

 

[britbox]

Well that's true - although I disagree about Roger beating Nole at Wimbo. Unless Nole has an off-day and Roger catches fire again. Maybe it'd happen if he knew Ralphy wasn't waiting, sharpening his blades for finals day... :snigger

I'd still make Federer a favourite against Nole on grass.