The Ultimate FEDAL (Wars) Thread

[El Dude]

Haha, good idea. I was thinking of starting a similar thread, but one by an administrator has more...moxie.

 

[El Dude]

How about:

7.) Has Rafa ever lost a match when healthy?

 

[Moxie]

I think there's almost no chance that this will work, but that's why I put up as many controversial ideas as I could think of. Drawing flies with honey, etc. I don't mind that the threads move organically as they will, but it is becoming so tiresome, if every one turns into a Fedal flame-out. Please help by stating your most controversial notion vis-a-vis Fedal. :lulz2:

 

[Moxie]

You anticipated me!

 

[Moxie]

How about:

7.) Has Rafa ever lost a match when healthy?

Excellent place to start. I do believe that some Rafa fans cry injury too often, and some of the rest of us fans get pulled into that wave too often. The major controversy is the 2009 FO. Did Rafa lose because he had gimpy knees or because Soderling played out of his mind great tennis? There are some of us who believe that both things can be true. Many of us, myself included, agree that Robbie played a fantastic match that day. But that it was also true that Nadal was on his last legs, literally.

Another bit is that in 2011, Djokovic was just better and Nadal was healthy. I think we all agree on this. Nadal was fine. Djokovic was out-playing him, and then got in his head. I think there are lesser moments when Nadal has lost (like Wimbledon) then begged off to due to injury. We can debate those, but they're not that important. Do you have other ones?

 

[El Dude]

Yeah, Rafa was just as good in 2011 as he was in 2010, which is probably his best year -- except against Novak.

Rafa overall:
2010: 71-10 (88%)
2011: 69-15 (82%)

Vs. Novak:
2010: 2-0
2011: 0-6

Vs. Everyone Else:
2010: 69-10 (87%)
2011: 69-9 (88%)

So technically he was actually a hair better in 2011, as he lost one fewer matches against everyone else.

 

[Moxie]

2011 was supposed to be his year to stop freaking worrying about Roger and own the field. Then Djokovic found his range. Folks like to talk about "dominance" and put Rafa a bit down on the scale, but this is also where injuries come in. If he hadn't lost 2009, then 2011 wouldn't have mattered as much. Anyway, Rafa has always said he had a very good 2011...Djokovic just had a better one.

 

[El Dude]

As for the Rafa injury thing, I agree that two things are true at the same time:

1) Some Rafa fans cry injury too often, and feel that Rafa almost only ever loses when injured (Although some Fedfans have their own version of this, but it is more psychological).
2) Rafa is rather prone to injury, more so than Roger and Novak, so there may be some truth to that assertion.

A further part of the "Rafa Injury Mystery," is the question of how his career would have looked if he had better health. His fans probably think he'd have 18+ Slams by now - certainly adding at least one of the 2013 and 14 AO, 2009 FO, etc. But the counter is that for Rafa to play like Rafa, and be as good as he is when he wins, he needs to play in such a way that is particularly injury provoking. His level of speed and fitness, his musculature, his all-out style...all of this leads to injury. The point being, a healthier Rafa might have been a less intense Rafa, and the whole thing would have equaled out.

 

[El Dude]

I kind of see the Bigger Three like Neopolitan ice cream. Which is best: vanilla, chocolate or strawberry? Vanilla (Roger) is, overall, the most versatile and useful, the "jack of all trades" flavor that fits every occasion. Furthermore, when you find really good vanilla it is just subtle magic. Chocolate (Rafa), however, is, well, chocolate. When chocolate is good, it is really really good, and there's just nothing like it. And then there's strawberry (Novak) which is, on the face of things, the inferior third flavor, but on the other hand when you want that fresh and fruity flavor, it has a life and vitality unlike the other two.

 

[Moxie]

As for the Rafa injury thing, I agree that two things are true at the same time:

1) Some Rafa fans cry injury too often, and feel that Rafa almost only ever loses when injured (Although some Fedfans have their own version of this, but it is more psychological).
2) Rafa is rather prone to injury, more so than Roger and Novak, so there may be some truth to that assertion.

A further part of the "Rafa Injury Mystery," is the question of how his career would have looked if he had better health. His fans probably think he'd have 18+ Slams by now - certainly adding at least one of the 2013 and 14 AO, 2009 FO, etc. But the counter is that for Rafa to play like Rafa, and be as good as he is when he wins, he needs to play in such a way that is particularly injury provoking. His level of speed and fitness, his musculature, his all-out style...all of this leads to injury. The point being, a healthier Rafa might have been a less intense Rafa, and the whole thing would have equaled out.

#2: Rafa isn't just more "prone" to injury, he has been more injured than the others of the big 4. I also get that his style of play has always been cited as a reason for that. Who will ever know, but live by the sword, die by the sword, and he's said as much. So I can give you that...i.e., without injury, he might not have been the same player. However, don't try to tell us fans what we think he may have by way of Majors now, without injury. 2013, I don't think we'd have added one there. 2014 AO might have been an option v. Wawrinka, without the back. Like Rafa, we'd just like to have seen him be able to play that match out, healthy. I can't think of another one that he just missed via injury, so I'm not sure where you're getting 18+. That would be part of another discussion, perhaps.

 

[El Dude]

Don't forget 2009 RG, as you mentioned above. I personally think that was mainly Soderling playing the match of his life, just as I think (some) Rafa fans undermine how good Stan was playing in 2014. But if we imagine Rafa having the health of Roger or Novak, but able to maintain his normal level, then think you've to figure he would have won more Slams; I just mentioned the three that seemed most obvious candidates.

The other thing is that some consider a player's ability to stay healthy as a skill, and it should be counted as part of their overall greatness portfolio.

In the end, all we can do is look at the actual record - and that is what we should judge players by. I mean, we can look at a David Nalbandian and recognize that he was a hugely talented player that underachieved, but in the end he was what he actually did, not what he could have done.

 

[El Dude]

But here's the real question we all secretly want to discuss:

Who is more biased and irrational in their love of their favorite guy and their hate of the other players, Carol or Front?

 

[Carol]

I'm not interesting on this thread. I know what I'm going to read, same old, same old and honesty I have enough with what I've read before. My interest and what I'm feeling good is to see that Rafa is healthy, his improved serve, FH and BH and of course his recovered confidence. There are diferent opinions depending the fav of each one and I'm not going to read anything new. Back to the other threads and diferent themes

 

[Moxie]

I kind of see the Bigger Three like Neopolitan ice cream. Which is best: vanilla, chocolate or strawberry? Vanilla (Roger) is, overall, the most versatile and useful, the "jack of all trades" flavor that fits every occasion. Furthermore, when you find really good vanilla it is just subtle magic. Chocolate (Rafa), however, is, well, chocolate. When chocolate is good, it is really really good, and there's just nothing like it. And then there's strawberry (Novak) which is, on the face of things, the inferior third flavor, but on the other hand when you want that fresh and fruity flavor, it has a life and vitality unlike the other two.

I love this, in all of its wackiness as metaphor. Vanilla is perfect for Roger, and exactly why I never liked him. Classic. But even at his best, still a bit vanilla. And Rafa IS chocolate. The NOT vanilla. Darker and stranger. And let's face it: sexier. I'm laughing that you make Djokovic strawberry. Because it's true: when the chocolate and vanilla are all gone, there's still loads of strawberry left. I'm thinking Murray is Rum Raisin. A very particular (and I'd suggest sophisticated) taste. The raisin is for crotchetiness.

 

[Moxie]

Don't forget 2009 RG, as you mentioned above. I personally think that was mainly Soderling playing the match of his life, just as I think (some) Rafa fans undermine how good Stan was playing in 2014. But if we imagine Rafa having the health of Roger or Novak, but able to maintain his normal level, then think you've to figure he would have won more Slams; I just mentioned the three that seemed most obvious candidates.

The other thing is that some consider a player's ability to stay healthy as a skill, and it should be counted as part of their overall greatness portfolio.

In the end, all we can do is look at the actual record - and that is what we should judge players by. I mean, we can look at a David Nalbandian and recognize that he was a hugely talented player that underachieved, but in the end he was what he actually did, not what he could have done.

Apparently we can debate forever how much of Soderling's win in 2009 was about him playing the match of his life, and whether or not any of that had to do with Rafa's knees going. I do believe that Soderling played 2 great matches in his career, above any others: when he beat Rafa at RG in '09, and when he beat Roger the next year. However, it is clear that tendinitis was taking Rafa down. Given what we know now, given Rafa's record at RG. Given that it even took a thin version of the real Rafa for even Djokovic to finally beat him, I think it's fair to say in retrospect that Rafa's knees probably contributed to his loss to Soderling. Which is not to take it away from Soderling. I'm sure we can hold two concepts in our head at the same time. It was an amazing upset by Robin, and well-deserved. As to Stan and the 2014 AO final, it's not even a matter of underestimating Stan. Rafa was not able to compete. We'll never know what would have happened had Rafa been full-strength.

So I don't know what 3 matches you mean that we Rafa fans would have said he should have won.

 

[Moxie]

I'm not interesting on this thread. I know what I'm going to read, same old, same old and honesty I have enough with what I've read before. My interest and what I'm feeling good is to see that Rafa is healthy, his improved serve, FH and BH and of course his recovered confidence. There are diferent opinions depending the fav of each one and I'm not going to read anything new. Back to the other threads and diferent themes

If you're not interested, it's very easy to just skip. No need to even comment.

 

[Carol]

If you're not interested, it's very easy to just skip. No need to even comment.

I won't any more but I've just want to say what I'm thinking about this thread (if you don't mind)

 

[Moxie]

I won't any more but I've just want to say what I'm thinking about this thread (if you don't mind)

I don't mind at all. But if you're going to participate in the Fedal Wars on other threads, (and you have,) why not here? Better here, than disrupting other conversations, no?

 

[Carol]

I don't mind at all. But if you're going to participate in the Fedal Wars on other threads, (and you have,) why not here? Better here, than disrupting other conversations, no?

On other threads even if we are talking about others players and diferent themes I see that it's more than imposible to avoid that war, there is always someone ready to start about it disrupting other conversation and provoking but at least we can change the subject or the player, the tournament, videos, anecdotes, jokes etc etc but on this thread always is going to be the same boring and repetitive comments and depending from whom then worse and worse

 

[Moxie]

On other threads even if we are talking about others players and diferent themes I see that it's more than imposible to avoid that war, there is always someone ready to start about it disrupting other conversation and provoking but at least we can change the subject or the player, the tournament, videos, anecdotes, jokes etc etc but on this thread always is going to be the same boring and repetitive comments and depending from whom then worse and worse

Actually "boring" (or not) is our responsibility. El Dude has already introduced the Neapolitan ice cream metaphor, so it's already more creative.