Is Federer the biggest choker among ATGs?

[Front242]

I know reading is fundamental and Listening is a Skill..(Did you really read my post)..This is why everyone has a problem with you..Reread my post and quit reacting like a defenseless animal or a child when their parents have arrived home to mayhem that was created by the child. Read, Listen, Learn and React to what you consumed..Don't respond to me with another of your junivelle post..BTW..Carol had nothing to do with what I wrote but again you try to attack her or myself but run from what that poster said about you..If you are afraid or my answers frightened you, you should cease asking scary questions.

What did you mention Carol and half the forum for so in your last post?! And no everyone does not have a problem with me. It's basically you, Moxie and Carol. 3 people.

 

[Ricardo]

Moronic posts...my last 2 post were about 6-7 weeks ago when Rafa hadn't won a title this year on clay that he would win RG ..I said RBA would be a threat at Wimbledon and that was one of the 3 players besides Rafa and Roger who could really press Novak at Wimbledon.. Finally, I said Roger's defense was still at the highest level...

What great revelation has anyone gotten from you over the past 2-5 years...not a damn thing..Front..you should learn from Fiero, BB, Moxie, KS and at times Darth..you NEVER give anyone credit for nothing..All you do is cosign comments that attack others credibility with a "like" but you NEVER stand on your own laurals..That's what I admire about Miss Carol, she stands on her own two feet ..she defends herself unlike You..I will find the post and attached it

You let this poster whipped the board with your dumbass posts..And did Nothing

and you did something?

 

[Ricardo]

My Lord..even when Roger wins, Front you still will find the most simplest frivolous shit to bitch about.

Its irrelevant, he pointed out gamesmanship... grow some brains. If Roger ended up choking closing out that match, I know you'll just diss him saying he didn't deserve. And Roger did win, so lets turn blind eye on the gamesmanship as well. It's about morality you shameless shit, he was right to point out...…...funny you bitch about someone saying the right thing.

 

[the AntiPusher]

What did you mention Carol and half the forum for so in your last post?! And no everyone does not have a problem with me. It's basically you, Moxie and Carol. 3 people.

Last post on this crap

What did you mention Carol and half the forum for so in your last post?! And no everyone does not have a problem with me. It's basically you, Moxie and Carol. 3 people.

No more posts from me you can have the last word..You live in a bubble with fear of that poster.

 

[Ricardo]

Last post on this crap

No more posts from me you can have the last word..You live in a bubble with fear of that poster.

chicken shit

 

[Moxie]

What did you mention Carol and half the forum for so in your last post?! And no everyone does not have a problem with me. It's basically you, Moxie and Carol. 3 people.

I don't have a problem with you, Front. I like you. It's just all that crap you spew about Rafa that I have a problem with.

 

[Front242]

I don't have a problem with you, Front. I like you. It's just all that crap you spew about Rafa that I have a problem with.

Likewise Moxie but a lot of the Nadal camp take things way too personally. To be fair , there's a lot of stuff Federer fans say that is true and that's where the problem lies in that the Nadal camp seem to think we're attacking them and not him. No we're not. But it's really hard to read people defending everything the guy does even when it's just not good sportsmanship. He's pretty good at tennis. He should be able to win matches without the things he does to piss his opponents off.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Given Nadal was fair from unbeatable this year at RG it's not out of the question as Roger was playing extremely well prior to the crap weather in the semi. Roger had 2 match points in Rome 2006 which was best of 5 back then.

He was also conned out of the first set by the despicable one again ruining his rhythm changing his fucking socks and bandages while down 5-2 in 2011 so no one will ever know how that would have panned out if Roger had actually not been subjected to bs gamesmanship that day and won the first set.

Must feel great to be a fan of scum like that who feel the need to stoop to anything to win and especially while trailing. And that btw is one of the main reasons why I hate that pos. The cheating to win mentality.

You dodged the question, predictably.

 

[brokenshoelace]

i'm going to start treating you like the piece of crap that you are. I have exposed you so many times it isn't even funny anymore. Yes, you were the moron who claimed Nadal was past his best in 2011, a shadow of himself on grass and clay. That Djokovic started to beat him because he was mentally weak, 'novak in his head'. You weren't man enough to handle the defeats, just like DarthFed floods the forums with tears and makes it seem like djokovic and nadal just beat Federer cause Fed just plays like a clown. I exposed you as nothing but a nadal fanboy who is a sore loser and has little knowledge of tennis. To claim Nadal, who had one of his best seasons ever in 2010 (better than 08) all of sudden became a shadow of himself as soon as the calendar year changed, is mental retardation. Had Djokovic not beaten Nadal is those 6-7 big finals, he would've had a MONSTER season.

yes, i have exposed you...

1- Never said Nadal was a shadow of himself. That's literally you making shit up again.
2- Nadal reached five consecutive Wimbledon finals between 2006 and 2011. Since then, the best he's done is two semi finals appearances. Every other loss has been before the QF. You don't think that's evidence of a decline on grass, at least between 2012 and 2017, or are you just that stupid?
3- Saying Novak is in his head DOES NOT mean Nadal is mentally weak. Also, Novak has to beat him first before he gets into his head. So it has nothing to do with my "not being man enough to handle defeat" as clearly Novak had to outplay him and beat him first before the mental scars developed. Scars, by the way, that Nadal himself openly acknowledged.
4- I have already addressed every single point above prior to this post and you ignored it and spewed the same nonsense.
5- So yeah, what have you exposed exactly?

 

[Front242]

You dodged the question, predictably.

No I didn't. I said the awful conditions in the semi affected Roger's game a lot more than Nadal's. On a wind free day I would have fancied Roger's chances the way he was playing at RG this year.

Nadal's loopy topspin allows him much more margin in the wind whereas Federer's attacking game was greatly neutralized by him not being able to hit through the court that day. Hitting winners was next to impossible in that wind. People who say it was the same for both are not seeing the whole picture and, like I said earlier in the thread, the match would have been completely different without the wind.

 

[brokenshoelace]

No I didn't. I said the awful conditions in the semi affected Roger's game a lot more than Nadal's. On a wind free day I would have fancied Roger's chances the way he was playing at RG this year.

So you're flat out saying you would have favored Roger to beat Nadal if the conditions were good?

 

[Front242]

So you're flat out saying you would have favored Roger to beat Nadal if the conditions were good?

I'm saying it would've been a lot closer and yes, he may have won. Nadal was not that impressive this year at all.

 

[brokenshoelace]

A regular game gives you time to regroup yourself, even after committing couple of blunders. But, TB is merciless.

I agree. But sooner or later I think fatigue and nerves would have gotten to Roger quicker than Novak, whereas a tie-break would theoretically allow him to pounce of a couple of points here and there to win it. Of course, he played the tie breaks awfully (I mean 11 unforced errors is just garbage).

 

[brokenshoelace]

I'm saying it would've been a lot closer and yes, he may have won. Nadal was not that impressive this year at all.

You think Nadal was impressive in every one of his 12 FO wins? I'd argue he didn't look that good in 2006, 2011, 2013, 2014 and 2018. This year was no exception. I don't know how many times Roger needs to lose to him at RG before you guys give up.

 

[Front242]

You think Nadal was impressive in every one of his 12 FO wins? I'd argue he didn't look that good in 2006, 2011, 2013, 2014 and 2018. This year was no exception. I don't know how many times Roger needs to lose to him at RG before you guys give up.

As I said earlier in the thread, he was conned out of the first set in 2011 and was very much there for the taking so no one will ever know how that would have gone down. If he'd won that it would have completely changed the clay dynamic.

 

[brokenshoelace]

As I said earlier in the thread, he was conned out of the first set in 2011 and was very much there for the taking so no one will ever know how that would have gone down. If he'd won that it would have completely changed the clay dynamic.

Just for everyone's reference, here are a few interesting points:

- The head to head on clay is 14-2.
- The head to head at Roland Garros is 6-0 in favor of Nadal.
- Federer has never managed to win more than a single set in any of those meetings.
- Federer's 2 wins on clay came literally over a decade ago, both with Nadal coming off a marathon and with no days off in between.
- Since that 2011 final which would have "completely changed the clay dynamic," Federer's results at Roland Garros have been: SF, QF, 4R, QF, skipped it entirely, skipped it entirely, skipped it entirely, SF.
- Since that 2011 final Nadal has gone on to win 6 (yes, count them, SIX) more French Opens.
- Federer being "conned" in 2011 is a reference to Nadal having the trainer remove bandages from his foot. He never even took a medical time out (you want me to send you evidence again?). But yeah, sure, that's what changed the whole match.
- Federer has only won RG one time in his career, again, a decade ago.

See, this is what makes me chuckle:

Nadal wins 2 Wimbledon titles, reaches multiple finals and actually manages to beat Federer there, yet for years we've had to hear from Fed fans about how trash he is on grass.

Federer wins 1 RG title because his daddy wasn't there in the final, fails to beat the worst ever version of Nadal at RG in 2011, and stinks up the joint post 2011, while giving up on the tournament entirely in 3 consecutive seasons, and yet it's completely fine for a Fed fan to make grandiose claims about "the clay dynamic changing completely" had Roger not lost a match due to Nadal having bandages removed during a changeover, and Federer winning a match in which he lost in straight sets had it not been windy.

 

[brokenshoelace]

PS: I always wonder how come it's the close clay losses that Federer didn't win that would have changed things entirely (Rome 2006, RG 2011), but never his 2 actual wins (Hamburg 2007 and Madrid 2009), which didn't change shit. Hmmmmm...

 

[the AntiPusher]

No I didn't. I said the awful conditions in the semi affected Roger's game a lot more than Nadal's. On a wind free day I would have fancied Roger's chances the way he was playing at RG this year.

Nadal's loopy topspin allows him much more margin in the wind whereas Federer's attacking game was greatly neutralized by him not being able to hit through the court that day. Hitting winners was next to impossible in that wind. People who say it was the same for both are not seeing the whole picture and, like I said earlier in the thread, the match would have been completely different without the wind.

another dumb post..the conditions were the same..if someone using topspin in heavy windy conditions while the latter is trying to hit through the wind with less spin, it's called playing tactically SMART. Tennis is not a fair weather sport. You can't say "Let's play the matches when God decides to take a break from doing his work". Rain ..yes Wind , No!

Have you EVER played the game!

Where's Mr. Fiero and Darth? How do they let you get away with such nonsense?

Where's that poster..he was correct that you posts some of the dumbest posts.

 

[Front242]

another dumb post..the conditions were the same..if someone using topspin in heavy windy conditions while the latter is trying to hit through the wind with less spin, it's called playing tactically SMART. Tennis is not a fair weather sport. You can't say "Let's play the matches when God decides to take a break from doing his work". Rain ..yes Wind , No!

Have you EVER played the game!

Where's Mr. Fiero and Darth? How do they let you get away with such nonsense?

Where's that poster..he was correct that you posts some of the dumbest posts.

My post made perfect sense to anyone who isn't a moron but I'll try and explain it to you...suffice to say though that if you think Federer's game wasn't affected more that day by the wind you need help. He goes for his shots way more which results in more errors even without the wind. Factor in the wind and, well, it's not hard to see who was more shit out of luck in this year's RG semi.

No one said you can decide when to play (although I'd argue they can cos Novak the pussy postponed his match) so I have no idea why you even brought that up but the wind clearly affected Federer more as he's a far more aggressive player than Nadal and wind affects people trying to rip winners a lot more than someone playing a safer game and trying to keep balls in play and outlast their opponent or force them into making errors. You make my logical post out to apparently be dumb when it makes sense and type a horseshit response.

Take a bow, Mongo.

 

[Front242]

PS: I always wonder how come it's the close clay losses that Federer didn't win that would have changed things entirely (Rome 2006, RG 2011), but never his 2 actual wins (Hamburg 2007 and Madrid 2009), which didn't change shit. Hmmmmm...

Those were best of 3. Duh.