Matches you recommend watching in the absence of live tennis

[Carol]

Of course, Nadal played his best. He was in tremendous shape and very aggressive. He was very close and would have beaten everyone else.
You are right, Novak was ok , which is far from his best. He played a strong 1 set, would he have played that level constantly, I believe he would have won in 3 or 4 sets.
But he couldn’t. He played mediocre overall, stayed in the match was always in front and played the big points at the end simply better.
I think most would agree who the better player on grass is.

The problem that some of the Novak fans have it's that even if he beats to one of the best players he never has played at 100%.... really? come on, he played excellent and with a big advantage like to keep the roof on. I'd like to see him playing and winning several HC tournaments and right after the AO and two weeks later to play another GS , then I can tell you that he really couldn't play at 100% and that's is exactly what happens to Rafa, even if he plays well (we know) his body can't be in the best conditions besides the change of the surface so close

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

The problem that some of the Novak fans have it's that even if he beats to one of the best players he never has played at 100%.... really? come on, he played excellent and with a big advantage like to keep the roof on. I'd like to see him playing and winning several HC tournaments and right after the AO and two weeks later to play another GS , then I can tell you that he really couldn't play at 100% and that's is exactly what happens to Rafa, even if he plays well (we know) his body can't be in the best conditions besides the change of the surface so close

These Grand Slam championships are a 'outdoor' event period.What would have happened if there was no roof?

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

These Grand Slam championships are a 'outdoor' event period.What would have happened if there was no roof?

That match trigged my memory and I went to check the official ruling at Wimbledon and yes the rule has been changed

" No player consultation.It will automatically be played outdoors even if it started under the roof the next day'.

 

[Carol]

These Grand Slam championships are a 'outdoor' event period.What would have happened if there was no roof?

Exactly! and right after they changed that silly regulation but....too late!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Exactly! and right after they changed that silly regulation but....too late!

Agree.

 

[Bonaca]

The problem that some of the Novak fans have it's that even if he beats to one of the best players he never has played at 100%.... really? come on, he played excellent and with a big advantage like to keep the roof on. I'd like to see him playing and winning several HC tournaments and right after the AO and two weeks later to play another GS , then I can tell you that he really couldn't play at 100% and that's is exactly what happens to Rafa, even if he plays well (we know) his body can't be in the best conditions besides the change of the surface so close

Not what I wrote , I was referring to this match.
But I have to admit, my conviction is if both play 100%, Novak will win. At least on HC, Indoor and Grass.

You honestly think Novak played excellent? He was pure crap two years before that match and on his long way back.
Both have won big titles after playing a lot of matches before. It’s one of their strengths.
Nadal had no health issues, had an extra night of rest and no signs of fatigue. He is a tennis robot.

Roof is just a poor excuse.

 

[Carol]

Not what I wrote , I was referring to this match.
But I have to admit, my conviction is if both play 100%, Novak will win. At least on HC, Indoor and Grass.

You honestly think Novak played excellent? He was pure crap two years before that match and on his long way back.
Both have won big titles after playing a lot of matches before. It’s one of their strengths.
Nadal had no health issues, had an extra night of rest and no signs of fatigue. He is a tennis robot.

Roof is just a poor excuse.

He is not more tennis robot than Novak who never ever is tired. And again, playing and winning most of the tournaments on clay including RG is superb but not the best way to play excellent on grass, maybe when there were in the 20's but not later

 

[Bonaca]

He is not more tennis robot than Novak who never ever is tired. And again, playing and winning most of the tournaments on clay including RG is superb but not the best way to play excellent on grass, maybe when there were in the 20's but not later

I can understand your point.
But most of you Nadal Fans nearly every time sound like he was playing an average opponent.
He was playing the one guy who beat him more often than anybody else. Nobody can do to Nadal what Novak did, no one.

You suggest he played too much in front of the slam, but what if he had played Not so much? His level would not have been that high! He needs the number of matches more than Novak or Roger. He was full of self believ because of his victories that year. He played more aggressiv than ever before in London. And again no signs of fatigue.

With the term Tennis robot I Not only mean his enormous endurance, also his inhuman discipline and focus on the game. He is the only one, of the Big3, without a family of his own and had never a mental/focus-walkabout like Novak had. His focus is simply incredible.
The biggest fighter/competitor in tennis, and despite that all, he is losing against Novak more often than winning. And this is for me that impressive.
I was repeating this over and over again because of my opinion about the player Nadal, one of the Goats.
You never give Novak any credit

 

[the AntiPusher]

My blood still boils with that insane decision to keep the roof closed,of course it was a huge advantage for Novak.

Correct..what's worst is now Wimbledon has amended that rule..

 

[Carol]

I can understand your point.
But most of you Nadal Fans nearly every time sound like he was playing an average opponent.
He was playing the one guy who beat him more often than anybody else. Nobody can do to Nadal what Novak did, no one.

You suggest he played too much in front of the slam, but what if he had played Not so much? His level would not have been that high! He needs the number of matches more than Novak or Roger. He was full of self believ because of his victories that year. He played more aggressiv than ever before in London. And again no signs of fatigue.

With the term Tennis robot I Not only mean his enormous endurance, also his inhuman discipline and focus on the game. He is the only one, of the Big3, without a family of his own and had never a mental/focus-walkabout like Novak had. His focus is simply incredible.
The biggest fighter/competitor in tennis, and despite that all, he is losing against Novak more often than winning. And this is for me that impressive.
I was repeating this over and over again because of my opinion about the player Nadal, one of the Goats.
You never give Novak any credit

When Novak had a mental/focus-walkabout? to me besides he never gets tired he has more confidence and better mentality than than Nadal and Federer. which we have seen them going through very bad times. Look Nadal after that AO 3014, he was through the worst mentally time of his career, 2015-16 he was losing again anyone in any surface. And yes, in the last years surprisingly Nadal has lost more than win against Novak which is showing his confidence maybe is not working so well like you say

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Correct..what's worst is now Wimbledon has amended that rule..

Indeed,Carol and I were just discussing the rule change....too late

 

[Moxie]

I can understand your point.
But most of you Nadal Fans nearly every time sound like he was playing an average opponent.
He was playing the one guy who beat him more often than anybody else. Nobody can do to Nadal what Novak did, no one.

You suggest he played too much in front of the slam, but what if he had played Not so much? His level would not have been that high! He needs the number of matches more than Novak or Roger. He was full of self believ because of his victories that year. He played more aggressiv than ever before in London. And again no signs of fatigue.

With the term Tennis robot I Not only mean his enormous endurance, also his inhuman discipline and focus on the game. He is the only one, of the Big3, without a family of his own and had never a mental/focus-walkabout like Novak had. His focus is simply incredible.
The biggest fighter/competitor in tennis, and despite that all, he is losing against Novak more often than winning. And this is for me that impressive.
I was repeating this over and over again because of my opinion about the player Nadal, one of the Goats.
You never give Novak any credit

"Most" Nadal fans act like he's playing an average opponent when he plays Novak? I don't think so. I'll give you this, though, I don't agree with anyone who says that Novak was top-drawer in either that 2018 SF or the Final last year. Yet he won both. Yes, it does sting for Nadal fans that Djokovic was pickable in 2018, and the decision to keep the roof closed on Day 2 was a serious advantage for Novak, who did need the help. He was still mounting his come-back and wasn't yet top-drawer. No one can say what would have happened if they'd opened the roof on Day 2, but it would have leveled the playing field for Nadal, who was the more in-form player. It just adds to the pain that Wimbledon has decided, after the fact, that leaving the decision to Djokovic was a mistake, which they have since corrected.

 

[Moxie]

Just watched Nadal d. Kyrgios Wimbledon 2019. That was an entertaining match, and full of vinegar.

 

[calitennis127]

This one hurts, but I think of it as the beginning of Djokovic’s HC dominance over Rafa, even though technically it was after the IW final.

Great highlight package.....you could see there just how much Nadal wanted to win that match and how convinced he was that it was his moment to finally win Miami. It was a real gut punch for him to lose it after being ahead and actually playing quite well.

And of course that demoralized feeling carried over to the clay season. Nadal was just very fortunate that Federer took Djokovic out at Roland Garros.

 

[Moxie]

Great highlight package.....you could see there just how much Nadal wanted to win that match and how convinced he was that it was his moment to finally win Miami. It was a real gut punch for him to lose it after being ahead and actually playing quite well.

And of course that demoralized feeling carried over to the clay season. Nadal was just very fortunate that Federer took Djokovic out at Roland Garros.

That 2011 final that didn't happen was not a given. Nadal hasn't won any RG because he was "lucky." Let's be honest.

 

[calitennis127]

That 2011 final that didn't happen was not a given. Nadal hasn't won any RG because he was "lucky." Let's be honest.

I never said it was a given. But Djokovic clearly would've been the favorite.

And I do think that Nadal has been lucky on a number of occasions in winning Roland Garros (most notably 2007, 2011, 2013, 2014, and 2019). Federer failing to convert on 18 breakpoints in the 2007 final was a preview of what happened at Wimbledon the following year. Nadal was also lucky to avoid Djokovic last year. Thiem gave him a nice assist.

 

[Moxie]

I never said it was a given. But Djokovic clearly would've been the favorite.

And I do think that Nadal has been lucky on a number of occasions in winning Roland Garros (most notably 2007, 2011, 2013, 2014, and 2019). Federer failing to convert on 18 breakpoints in the 2007 final was a preview of what happened at Wimbledon the following year. Nadal was also lucky to avoid Djokovic last year. Thiem gave him a nice assist.

As to 2011, a thing that gets lost in the bluster of Djokovic having won 4 finals in a row v Nadal, including 2 on clay, at that moment, was that: for Djokovic to have made that final, he'd have had to come back on Saturday to finish that match v. Roger. One set to decide it, and all of their sets were tight on the Friday. With a bit of rest, and given that there is no 5th set TB at RG, they would almost surely have played for an hour +, and even possibly 2 hours, before the eventual winner would have met Nadal on the Sunday. That's no way to prepare for a final with Nadal at RG. To say that Djokovic would have "clearly" been the favorite is BS. It would have been his first RG final, and he'd have been hampered. Given how poorly he performed in what was his eventual first final at RG, it's hard to argue that he'd have surely been the winner, had they met in 2011.

Ah, and all of those other years when Rafa got "lucky":

2007: As per usual, you think a well-played set should have changed the course of the match. Likewise, 2011, though 2011 Roger was much closer.
2013: Rafa out-played Novak for the majority of that match. Novak was lucky to get it to a 5th. Then he ran out of gas and ideas.
2014: He beat Novak in 4...I don't understand your notion that he got "lucky" here.
2019: You're pretending that Djokovic "would" have won, had Thiem not beaten Djokovic in the semis. I won't say that Djokovic wouldn't have been a more formidable opponent, but you're ignoring the fact, again, that Djokovic would have been the guy that played a hard day on Sat. v Thiem, just to get the final. You seem to forget that for all the times they've played at RG, Nole has only beaten Rafa when he was in his worst year, overall.

And yes, Roger didn't convert 18 BPs, in the same way that he failed to convert 13 (or whatever) BPs v. Nadal at Wimbledon. 2008. But this is part of tennis. And Rafa has a great record of saving BPs, as well as a great break-back rate. Not all opportunities are merely squandered. Sometimes the other guy saves himself, and lives on to win the day. But to pretend that a guy who has won RG 12 times is "lucky" is rather delusional.

 

[calitennis127]

As to 2011, a thing that gets lost in the bluster of Djokovic having won 4 finals in a row v Nadal, including 2 on clay, at that moment, was that: for Djokovic to have made that final, he'd have had to come back on Saturday to finish that match v. Roger. One set to decide it, and all of their sets were tight on the Friday. With a bit of rest, and given that there is no 5th set TB at RG, they would almost surely have played for an hour +, and even possibly 2 hours, before the eventual winner would have met Nadal on the Sunday. That's no way to prepare for a final with Nadal at RG. To say that Djokovic would have "clearly" been the favorite is BS. It would have been his first RG final, and he'd have been hampered. Given how poorly he performed in what was his eventual first final at RG, it's hard to argue that he'd have surely been the winner, had they met in 2011.

Djokovic was in phenomenal physical condition at that time (just like he is now). Playing for an hour or two on Saturday would not have hampered him come Sunday. Either way, Nadal is very fortunate that Federer reached the semifinal and knocked Djokovic out for him.

As for it being Djokovic’s first final at Roland Garros? I hope you’re kidding. You’re talking about a guy who already had multiple MS titles under his belt, had won 2 Grand Slams, and had played in multiple Grand Slam Finals. He had also already played Nadal at Roland Garros. There would have been no fear of the stage.

By your logic, Djokovic should have been on his back foot in the Wimbledon final a month later, playing a 2-time champ and 4-time finalist in Nadal. But he mopped the floor with him in one of his easiest major final victories, just like he should have a year earlier.

If you recall, in 2010 I told everyone on this board that Nadal was lucky that Djokovic crashed against Berdych because he would have beaten Nadal in the final. In particular, hunting4aclue and that idiot BwokenWooWace jumped all over me and tried to explain that Djokovic wasn’t good enough on grass.

10 years later, Djokovic has 5 Wimbledon’s to Nadal’s 2. Djokovic would have beaten him in 2010 as well.

 

[Bonaca]

When Novak had a mental/focus-walkabout? to me besides he never gets tired he has more confidence and better mentality than than Nadal and Federer. which we have seen them going through very bad times. Look Nadal after that AO 3014, he was through the worst mentally time of his career, 2015-16 he was losing again anyone in any surface. And yes, in the last years surprisingly Nadal has lost more than win against Novak which is showing his confidence maybe is not working so well like you say

When was his walkabout?? After FO 2016 and Wimbledon 2018 he was losing nearly everything.
never the same player till today. And it’s not only about physical issues.
He clearly wasn’t focused that anymore.
Remember he has two children, and still managing to be no 1 . Not to have a family is what I would call a huge advantage FOR Nadal.

 

[Moxie]

Djokovic was in phenomenal physical condition at that time (just like he is now). Playing for an hour or two on Saturday would not have hampered him come Sunday. Either way, Nadal is very fortunate that Federer reached the semifinal and knocked Djokovic out for him.

As for it being Djokovic’s first final at Roland Garros? I hope you’re kidding. You’re talking about a guy who already had multiple MS titles under his belt, had won 2 Grand Slams, and had played in multiple Grand Slam Finals. He had also already played Nadal at Roland Garros. There would have been no fear of the stage.

By your logic, Djokovic should have been on his back foot in the Wimbledon final a month later, playing a 2-time champ and 4-time finalist in Nadal. But he mopped the floor with him in one of his easiest major final victories, just like he should have a year earlier.

If you recall, in 2010 I told everyone on this board that Nadal was lucky that Djokovic crashed against Berdych because he would have beaten Nadal in the final. In particular, hunting4aclue and that idiot BwokenWooWace jumped all over me and tried to explain that Djokovic wasn’t good enough on grass.

10 years later, Djokovic has 5 Wimbledon’s to Nadal’s 2. Djokovic would have beaten him in 2010 as well.

Funny, you're the guy always trying to school me in sports psychology, when it comes to Djokovic or Federer losing, but when the reverse is an option, suddenly they come up aces, and it doesn't work for you in the same way. Also, you often don't seem to think that MS1000s matter as barometers for these outcomes, except when they do, I guess. Aren't you the guy who thinks that Nadal beating Novak in Canada in 2013 had no bearing on Nadal beating Novak in the final of the USO that year? Oh, and right, sure, you had the early bead on Djokovic, who lost to Berdych at Wimbledon. (In straights.) Give me a break. This was the Djokovic of the Todd Martin era who couldn't buy a first serve, or a 2nd one. Berdych also beat Roger in his run to the final. 10 years later, and Nadal has 4 USOs to Novak's 3. What does that tell us?