Matches you recommend watching in the absence of live tennis

[Moxie]

Why am i not surprised about the TOP 90-suggestion? You dont have to take every line word by word, sometimes read between them.

Of course 19 is better than 17, but 29 is also better than 26. Sadly they did not play all Slam F against each other, the record for Nadal would be worse , but their h2h is very personal with no excuses, the better player leads.

Stanislaus is not that heavy and by far not that muscular, try a better example.
If Novak is, the other too also are. The talent difference is not that big, except you think Nadal and Roger are much more talented than Novak, and his only chance to reach them is doping to close that gap? That would be the badest joke from you ever.
I think and hope all of them are clean, if not, they all tune up, thats ok for me too.
Novaks body constitution suits better for endurance sports than Nadals bully body. Also Andys or Rogers.

What is worth to read a lot about, in my opinion, is nutrition science. Maybe, just maybe it could answer you some of your dog-whistle questions about Novak.
But Nadal is one of a kind, isnt he? Of course he has a lot of talent, but many players have. What makes the difference is stamina, mental toughness and alien working discipline. Talent isnt the leading one in his case.

I never wrote Nadal is the only one who wins with stamina, but he is the one to do this the most out of the three.

So, on the one hand, I shouldn't take you too literally about your "top 90" remark, but at the same time, you're saying that, with more stamina, the likes of Monfils, Tsonga, Murray (who else?) could have 19 Majors and be on the level with Nadal. Is that what you're contending? That really anyone could have 12 RG titles if they just weren't so fucking lazy?

As to Stan, you're just wrong. I challenge anyone to say that he's not "built like a tank." That's a quote from commentators who have met him. To deny that is just being contentious because I proved against your point. You said: "Novaks body constitution suits better for endurance sports than Nadals bully body." Funny, then why does it collapse so often? I was just watching the rerun of Wawrinka d Djokovic at USO 2016. He'd spent something like half the hours on court that Stan had, across the tournament, and yet his big toe hurt and he couldn't stand the strain. Where was the endurance there? It was too hot when he played Murray at Wimbledon in 2013, I guess, and he'd had a rough SF v del Potro. Too windy at the USO when he lost to Murray in 2012 in the final. Not sure what happened when he had to retire v Murray in the final of Cincinnati in 2011. But yeah, sure, he's built for endurance. At least Nadal has never bailed on a final, even when injured, and Roger has never retired out of a match in his whole career.

Now, I have never maintained that Roger and Rafa are more talented than Novak. Only that they're more popular. I do contend, however, that the notion of "talent" is mostly subjective. Surely everyone agrees that Roger exudes it, and Novak has loads. I would say that it's obvious that Nadal does, too, but some don't like his unusual style of play, and the fact that he's not ashamed to show that you work hard for what you get. I don't think that makes his tennis less good or thrilling. It surely doesn't make it less effective. I, too, also hope all of them are clean, but if slurs come out, slurs will get thrown.

As to the H2H between Novak and Rafa. 29-26 is a difference of 3 matches, if I need to point that out. That is a triffle. You want an impressive H2H? Nadal's over Roger (24-16.) And he beat him early and often, in his salad days and on the big stages. Novak has done most of his beating up on both later on in their careers. You said, "sadly, they [Novak and Rafa] did not play all Slam F against each other," because, you contend, that Rafa would have come out the worse. History does not bear that out. Also, you don't get to invent history that didn't happen. WTF? Anyway, as the Federer fans long and often point out, the H2H v one player doesn't mean everything. Could give bonus points at the end, though. It will still come down to who wins the most Majors. 20 is still better than 19, and 19 is still better than 17.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

The funniest thing in all of this is that Novak Djokovic probably has more stamina than Nadal.

But the true king of stamina is none other than Roger Federer. Even at nearly 40 years old he can still play five sets, run like crazy, barely sweat, never look tired ,and take five seconds between points. At least Nadal has to pace himself, take time between points and sometimes looks like he’s trying to recuperate. If Nadal had Roger Federer’s stamina he would have over 50 slams.

Djokovic is up there with Federer in terms of stamina too he’s content to push the ball forever from the baseline while at least Nadal wants to end points at the net or with his big forehand. And all three of them have huge mental toughness and work ethic but again Bonaca pretends that it’s only an advantage for Nadal. Lol Novak Djokovic is basically an Andy Murray with huge mental toughness. Lol

 

[Bonaca]

So, on the one hand, I shouldn't take you too literally about your "top 90" remark, but at the same time, you're saying that, with more stamina, the likes of Monfils, Tsonga, Murray (who else?) could have 19 Majors and be on the level with Nadal. Is that what you're contending? That really anyone could have 12 RG titles if they just weren't so fucking lazy?

As to Stan, you're just wrong. I challenge anyone to say that he's not "built like a tank." That's a quote from commentators who have met him. To deny that is just being contentious because I proved against your point. You said: "Novaks body constitution suits better for endurance sports than Nadals bully body." Funny, then why does it collapse so often? I was just watching the rerun of Wawrinka d Djokovic at USO 2016. He'd spent something like half the hours on court that Stan had, across the tournament, and yet his big toe hurt and he couldn't stand the strain. Where was the endurance there? It was too hot when he played Murray at Wimbledon in 2013, I guess, and he'd had a rough SF v del Potro. Too windy at the USO when he lost to Murray in 2012 in the final. Not sure what happened when he had to retire v Murray in the final of Cincinnati in 2011. But yeah, sure, he's built for endurance. At least Nadal has never bailed on a final, even when injured, and Roger has never retired out of a match in his whole career.

Now, I have never maintained that Roger and Rafa are more talented than Novak. Only that they're more popular. I do contend, however, that the notion of "talent" is mostly subjective. Surely everyone agrees that Roger exudes it, and Novak has loads. I would say that it's obvious that Nadal does, too, but some don't like his unusual style of play, and the fact that he's not ashamed to show that you work hard for what you get. I don't think that makes his tennis less good or thrilling. It surely doesn't make it less effective. I, too, also hope all of them are clean, but if slurs come out, slurs will get thrown.

As to the H2H between Novak and Rafa. 29-26 is a difference of 3 matches, if I need to point that out. That is a triffle. You want an impressive H2H? Nadal's over Roger (24-16.) And he beat him early and often, in his salad days and on the big stages. Novak has done most of his beating up on both later on in their careers. You said, "sadly, they [Novak and Rafa] did not play all Slam F against each other," because, you contend, that Rafa would have come out the worse. History does not bear that out. Also, you don't get to invent history that didn't happen. WTF? Anyway, as the Federer fans long and often point out, the H2H v one player doesn't mean everything. Could give bonus points at the end, though. It will still come down to who wins the most Majors. 20 is still better than 19, and 19 is still better than 17.

You want to make a fight about all of this, because of a conversation i had with nadaltroll? Ok, thats on you.
I always like to argue with you because i like you. I feel the need to emphasize that.

No i did not wrote Tsonga, Murray or Monfils (really Gael????) would have the same career Nadal has with more stamina. It is not only about this, I am sure there is no need to discuss it. Espacially the twelve RG titles, this can only be managed by a freak! Everything Nadal did off clay is not that impressive.

The fake swiss is not comparable to Nadals body anatomy. He doesn't play in the same league as the three. No one does.
Look at the excuses of some so called Nadal fans out there for his losses. We can keep this going forever. Now you come around the corner with this retiring stuff about Novak, what for? to keep your arguments above the water?

29-26 is not a big difference, no one said that. but it is a big sample size, and that makes the result more significant. Novak is better than Nadal, espacially the last ten years. I am sure Nadal is not that stupid, not to be happy for any tournamnet where he can avoid Novak. The quality of the 3 makes their h2h so special. And Novak leads them BOTH!!
Nadal would have come much worse, no doubt about that. Novak is his biggest problem, i dont know if he isnt smart enough or good enough to solve this problem.
Haha 19-17 no big difference, and still counting. You cannot be the GOAT with such an signifikant failure in h2h.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Haha 19-17 no big difference, and still counting. You cannot be the GOAT with such an signifikant failure in h2h.

19-17 is not a big difference but 29-26 is a significant failure. We have a Donald Trump on our forum.

 

[Bonaca]

The funniest thing in all of this is that Novak Djokovic probably has more stamina than Nadal.

But the true king of stamina is none other than Roger Federer. Even at nearly 40 years old he can still play five sets, run like crazy, barely sweat, never look tired ,and take five seconds between points. At least Nadal has to pace himself, take time between points and sometimes looks like he’s trying to recuperate. If Nadal had Roger Federer’s stamina he would have over 50 slams.

Djokovic is up there with Federer in terms of stamina too he’s content to push the ball forever from the baseline while at least Nadal wants to end points at the net or with his big forehand. And all three of them have huge mental toughness and work ethic but again Bonaca pretends that it’s only an advantage for Nadal. Lol Novak Djokovic is basically an Andy Murray with huge mental toughness. Lol
[/QUOTE

19-17 is not a big difference but 29-26 is a significant failure. We have a Donald Trump on our

No no now you went too far, don’t be condescending to Big Donald, at least he knows where on earth the prettiest women came from!!

Don’t forget the context when writing your shit pink sheet.
Your Goat is one behind Roger and three behind Novak, what fucking goat is that Bull?

 

[Moxie]

You want to make a fight about all of this, because of a conversation i had with nadaltroll? Ok, thats on you.
I always like to argue with you because i like you. I feel the need to emphasize that.

I like you, too. And I like to argue. And I like to argue with you. Nothing to do with any troll. Purely about your own statements.

No i did not wrote Tsonga, Murray or Monfils (really Gael????) would have the same career Nadal has with more stamina. It is not only about this, I am sure there is no need to discuss it. Espacially the twelve RG titles, this can only be managed by a freak! Everything Nadal did off clay is not that impressive.

You're not doing a very good job of walking back your statement about Nadal without stamina is barely top 90, or whatever. Because you basically ARE implying that with more stamina and probably mental toughness, that other players in the top 90-ish could also have had his career, if that's all it takes. So I offered a few names.

As to the bolded above, 12 Roland Garros titles are not won because he's a "freak," they're won because he's a very talented tennis player. Are Roger and Novak freaks because they've got the record-most men's (8 each) titles at Wimbledon and the AO? And of course everything Rafa has done off of clay is not as impressive as that. Nothing Roger or Novak has done on any surface or at any major is as impressive as that. Because it's never been done before. On the other hand, if you meant that what he's done off-clay is "not that impressive," in the dismissive sense, that's just ridiculous. He's won 7 Majors off of clay. That alone would make him an all-time great. He's even won more at the USO than Novak, and is just one behind Roger.

The fake swiss is not comparable to Nadals body anatomy. He doesn't play in the same league as the three. No one does. Look at the excuses of some so called Nadal fans out there for his losses. We can keep this going forever. Now you come around the corner with this retiring stuff about Novak, what for? to keep your arguments above the water?

Actually, Stan is very comparable to Nadal's body type. I'll spare you the shirtless photos, which you can google for yourself, but both are more sturdily-built, more barrel-chested, with thicker legs, bigger butts and a generally lower center of gravity than either Roger or Novak. This is not about him playing as consistently great as the Big 3, but to say he doesn't play in the "same league." Well, actually he does. I don't think I need to remind you. But the point is, and I won't say this again, but you were saying that Nadal isn't built like an endurance athlete, and I'd submit that he's built very similarly to Wawrinka, who also has very good endurance. I'm saying that your very un-medical statement/observation holds no water.

My point in bringing in Novak's retirements is specifically to do with "endurance." You seem to think that his and Roger's body-types should be more suited to endurance, and yet sometimes they don't seem to be.

29-26 is not a big difference, no one said that. but it is a big sample size, and that makes the result more significant. Novak is better than Nadal, espacially the last ten years. I am sure Nadal is not that stupid, not to be happy for any tournamnet where he can avoid Novak. The quality of the 3 makes their h2h so special. And Novak leads them BOTH!!
Nadal would have come much worse, no doubt about that. Novak is his biggest problem, i dont know if he isnt smart enough or good enough to solve this problem.
Haha 19-17 no big difference, and still counting. You cannot be the GOAT with such an signifikant failure in h2h.

I contend that Novak is NOT better than Nadal, though he has a H2H advantage. Would you say that Nadal is better than Roger, given the H2H? I do think all 3 are equally great, with different strengths. The Federer fans will hate that. They'd like to think he is the actual GOAT, and are unhappy that Rafa and Novak are catching him up in many ways. I absolutely agree that Djokovic is Nadal's biggest problem, if you put his knees aside. As Rafa has/had been Roger's. I don't know how to address your point about what would have happened had they met in more big finals. Kind of depends when, too, doesn't it? I know you have at least a couple in mind, but you can't create an outcome for a match never played. There most certainly has to be "doubt about that." As to Rafa, he is modest and smart enough to say that he's perfectly happy when he doesn't have to play Nole or Roger. Why wouldn't he be? I'm sure they'd say the same, if they were being candid and honest. As to solving his "Novak" problem, he's a great problem solver. Even arrogant, intransigent Roger went some way to solving his "Rafa" problem, so it could yet happen.

 

[don_fabio]

Yesterday I watched USO 2016 final, Novak-Stan for the first time. I can't beleive how Novak lost this match mentally. He could't convert numerous break point opportunities, was better for the first 3 sets, but in crucial moments when he got broken serving to stay in set 2 and set 3 he was scared of Stan, scared of losing and it got to him.

The whole match his body language was very negative and as the match progressed he started talking more and more, looking to his box and making comments. Not sure why he did not fight with Stan like in those AO epic matches, instead he was constantly pissed off because on many big points he made unforced errors or Stan produced winners due to his passive play.

I feel like this is one of those matches that Novak was supposed to win considering how the match was going if only he was more present on the court and focused. Stan was not playing unbelieveable tennis and was making plenty of UE, yet Novak was unable to capitalize on numerous opportunities. If I have to compare this match with RG, I think in RG he was just overplayed by Stan, but here in USO final Stan was beatable that day. No wonder Novak admitted that he was pissed off with loss.

Tennis is so much mental and Novak lost it mentally here, but kudos to Stan too for pushing Novak losing the match this way.

 

[Moxie]

^ I watched it again the other day, too. I remember someone who was a big poster around here, bit Novak fan saying, after the match that Stan had really out-played Novak at RG in 2015, but that he'd outsmarted him in that USO final. Djokovic was pretty mentally all over the place in that match. It was earlier on in that mental walkabout that Djokovic went on, starting maybe with that early loss to Querrey at Wimbledon 2 months before, followed up by losing in the first round at the Olympics, which I thought was a bit of a lingering disappointment for him.

 

[don_fabio]

^ I watched it again the other day, too. I remember someone who was a big poster around here, bit Novak fan saying, after the match that Stan had really out-played Novak at RG in 2015, but that he'd outsmarted him in that USO final. Djokovic was pretty mentally all over the place in that match. It was earlier on in that mental walkabout that Djokovic went on, starting maybe with that early loss to Querrey at Wimbledon 2 months before, followed up by losing in the first round at the Olympics, which I thought was a bit of a lingering disappointment for him.

The loss against Querrey started his downfall, but loss in Olympics was something that really hurt him. Then coming to US Open and reaching final if I remember quite easy only to surrender to Stan is a bit puzzling to me. He should have had some mental strength left there to sort of bounce back to winning a slam or at least put up a great fight until the last ball. Something that worked for him after many dissapointments in RG, he bounced back and won Wimbledon, but here in USO he was really "not there" as we are used to see him in slam finals.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Don Fabio,

I am rewatching the AO 2020 after a first set clinic from Novak,he let the umpires decision get to him and in ways he opened the door for Theim.I understand you cannot keep that level of tennis up all match,again as you [previously stated 'tennis is such a mental game'.,loss of concentration,gives your opponent a opportunity to get back into a match.

 

[Moxie]

The loss against Querrey started his downfall, but loss in Olympics was something that really hurt him. Then coming to US Open and reaching final if I remember quite easy only to surrender to Stan is a bit puzzling to me. He should have had some mental strength left there to sort of bounce back to winning a slam or at least put up a great fight until the last ball. Something that worked for him after many dissapointments in RG, he bounced back and won Wimbledon, but here in USO he was really "not there" as we are used to see him in slam finals.

I'm glad if you agree with me about the Olympics in Rio. I have always thought that it was a big blow he didn't need, if he was feeling a bit "fragile," or burnt out from the big push to win the Nole Slam, or whatever. I just checked, and Novak indeed had a walkover and 2 retirements, including one v. Tsonga in the QFs on his road to that final, whereas Stan had a pretty rough one. The commentators did say, in my re-watch the other day, that Stan had about twice as many hours on court as Nole. There's always an argument that too much time off in the middle of a big tournament can be a hinderance, too, but just how tetchy Novak was in that match is a head-scratcher. He saw the trainer a couple of times later in the match for a couple of supposedly bad toes, but it's hard to believe that he was having foot issues, having had such a soft ride to the final. This is part of a whole patch when he was mentally more checked-out than dialed in.

 

[Moxie]

Don Fabio,

I am rewatching the AO 2020 after a first set clinic from Novak,he let the umpires decision get to him and in ways he opened the door for Theim.I understand you cannot keep that level of tennis up all match,again as you [previously stated 'tennis is such a mental game'.,loss of concentration,gives your opponent a opportunity to get back into a match.

IMO, Novak is more prone to that than either Rafa or Roger, i.e., hanging onto a call/decision he doesn't like and letting it carry over.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

IMO, Novak is more prone to that than either Rafa or Roger, i.e., hanging onto a call/decision he doesn't like and letting it carry over.

Yes,I thought by now he would 'grow out of it' lol! not to be sad to say.

 

[don_fabio]

Don Fabio,

I am rewatching the AO 2020 after a first set clinic from Novak,he let the umpires decision get to him and in ways he opened the door for Theim.I understand you cannot keep that level of tennis up all match,again as you [previously stated 'tennis is such a mental game'.,loss of concentration,gives your opponent a opportunity to get back into a match.

He worked so hard to get back to that set 2 in AO 20 and then just disappeared because of some umpire's decisions. He just needs to control his emotions better, but I'm afraid we are going to see more of this in the future when other players continue to push him and he feels that the match could slip away in those important moments.

 

[Moxie]

He worked so hard to get back to that set 2 in AO 20 and then just disappeared because of some umpire's decisions. He just needs to control his emotions better, but I'm afraid we are going to see more of this in the future when other players continue to push him and he feels that the match could slip away in those important moments.

One thing I think we're seeing, or will see, as you suggest, from all of the Big 3 is more nerves in the big moments. Let's face it: Roger choked when he had last year's Wimbledon in his hand and on his serve. Rafa was up 2 sets and a break on Medvedev at the USO, yet he never seemed relaxed, and risked losing it. To the different degrees that they're willing to acknowledge/embrace the Majors race, they know it's out there, and they know that their chances of catching the brass ring get more limited. In their salad days, the future stretched in front of them, endlessly. What they've lost in youthful energy, they've gained in experience. But experience can make you tentative, feeling the weight of what you have to lose and understanding that chances become more proscribed.

 

[kskate2]

Found another tape: 2007 Wimbledon
3R Marathon match spread over 5 days between Nadal/Soderling
QF match between Roddick/Gasquet where Andy was up 2 sets and a break and completed one of the most comprehensive chokes in Center Court history

Been watching all the matches from 2005 USO, specifically:
Nalby vs Gonzo
Fed vs Rochus
Fed vs Agassi

 

[Jelenafan]

One of my fave matches from the great Stefan Edberg versus Andre AGassi in an IW finals , circa 1990:



I believe this was the first MASTERS classified tourney.

There never will be another BH volleyer like Stefan, it was like Buttahh.........

 

[Fiero425]

One of my fave matches from the great Stefan Edberg versus Andre AGassi in an IW finals , circa 1990:



I believe this was the first MASTERS classified tourney.

There never will be another BH volleyer like Stefan, it was like Buttahh.........

This was a classic; very windy conditions w/ sand blowing onto court! It took about the same amt. of time as any 5 setter w/ 2 tough TB's!

 

[britbox]

One of my fave matches from the great Stefan Edberg versus Andre AGassi in an IW finals , circa 1990:



I believe this was the first MASTERS classified tourney.

There never will be another BH volleyer like Stefan, it was like Buttahh.........

That's a gem of a match. S&V v Baseliner. Edberg's backhand volley was poetry in motion.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

That's a gem of a match. S&V v Baseliner. Edberg's backhand volley was poetry in motion.

Edberg is definitely one of the best volleyers of all time alongside McEnroe, Nadal, Becker, Sampras and Rafter.