The Ultimate FEDAL (Wars) Thread

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,608
Reactions
14,768
Points
113
I don't really disagree with any of the above but I think you know there's a difference between saying Nadal would've won if he wasn't injured and saying the injury probably played a role in his subpar performance.

I'd also add, and have mentioned before, that his tendinitis was probably made a lot worse by that match. He was being run around like a rag doll all day and of course that isn't good when he was already having problems. So the Nadal who pulled out of Wimbledon was likely more injured than the one who faced Sod.
Personally, I'll take this amount of concession from you that injury contributed to the loss. There's no reason to take away from Soderling's performance that day, and I don't think anyone does. That upset and the one over Roger the next year are two of the highlights of his sadly shortened career. It bears remembering that Soderling beat Nadal in the 4th round that year, so I don't know if anyone is arguing that had Nadal gotten past Soderling, he'd have won the tournament. His knees were bad. As you say, Darth, probably made worse by that match. It's an attritional injury. Personally, I don't think he'd have made it to the final, anyway. If he had, I think it's fair to think that Roger would likely have picked him off. Ironically, Fed fans should be almost sorry that Soderling won, as Roger would likely have gotten that scalp over Rafa at RG. We'd still be arguing over the state of the knees, but it would be in terms of Federer win, not a Soderling one. Now there's an alternate universe for you to contemplate.
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,008
Reactions
7,120
Points
113
Thanks for confirming re: Roger/Rafa relative sizes. Writers doing profile pieces on Nadal often remark that he's both taller and more slender than he looks on TV.

Now, I saw Ferrer at breakfast in my hotel in Buenos Aires once. I agree that you wouldn't say "that guy must be a professional athlete," however, he's not "tiny." He's a little taller than me and I'm 5'7". Olivier Rochus is tiny. Also, Jim Courier is works in my neighborhood so I've seen him several times, and he's normal sized. He held the door for me once in a restaurant. Listed at 6'1," which seems right. Safin, however, IS a giant. I saw him on the practice courts at the USO.

View attachment 1616
JC is only 6'1 not a giant like Safin..thats correct.Murray is a giant ..more closer to high 6-3 to 6-4 range
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Personally, I'll take this amount of concession from you that injury contributed to the loss. There's no reason to take away from Soderling's performance that day, and I don't think anyone does. That upset and the one over Roger the next year are two of the highlights of his sadly shortened career. It bears remembering that Soderling beat Nadal in the 4th round that year, so I don't know if anyone is arguing that had Nadal gotten past Soderling, he'd have won the tournament. His knees were bad. As you say, Darth, probably made worse by that match. It's an attritional injury. Personally, I don't think he'd have made it to the final, anyway. If he had, I think it's fair to think that Roger would likely have picked him off. Ironically, Fed fans should be almost sorry that Soderling won, as Roger would likely have gotten that scalp over Rafa at RG. We'd still be arguing over the state of the knees, but it would be in terms of Federer win, not a Soderling one. Now there's an alternate universe for you to contemplate.

I disagree and in general the difference between where a lot of Rafa fans stand on that match is that they think Rafa was totally crippled and would've lost to many players. I doubt that, it was a perfect storm facing a big hitter on his career day. I do think Rafa would've at least made the final and would've been the favorite there. Roger is, was, and always will be better than Sod but that doesn't mean he would've been better equipped to beat Nadal at RG even in 2009.
 
Last edited:

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,608
Reactions
14,768
Points
113
I disagree and in general the difference between where a lot of Rafa fans stand on that match is that they think Rafa was totally crippled and would've lost to many players. I doubt that, it was a perfect storm facing a big hitter on his career day. I do think Rafa would've at least made the final and would've been the favorite there. Roger is, was, and always will be better than Sod but that doesn't mean he would've been better equipped to beat Nadal at RG even in 2009.
I guess this is the difference between how much we all think Nadal was impaired.

I don't think any of us has said he was "crippled." But it really does surprise me that you're so committed to Nadal's relative fitness, that you're even unwilling to say that Rafa would have likely beaten Roger, had he made the final. It's hard to know what that says about your investment in Rafa's fitness, or lack of confidence in Roger, at that stage. Either way, I don't think it speaks well of Roger.
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
You're overthinking it. Basically Sod destroying the ball off both wings including his strong two-handed backhand could give Rafa more problems at RG when you consider Roger's matchup issue at the time and the fact Rafa had already taken residence in his head.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
I disagree and in general the difference between where a lot of Rafa fans stand on that match is that they think Rafa was totally crippled and would've lost to many players. I doubt that, it was a perfect storm facing a big hitter on his career day. I do think Rafa would've at least made the final and would've been the favorite there. Roger is, was, and always will be better than Sod but that doesn't mean he would've been better equipped to beat Nadal at RG even in 2009.

This, I agree with, and I think this is where the disconnect is. This wasn't a case of Nadal being so injured he would have lost against any top 10 player like his 2011 AO loss to Ferrer, where he hurt his hamstring in the third game of the match and lost in easy straight sets. In fact, in the Soderling match, Nadal was up a break in the fourth set, got broke back and lost in the tie-break. So it's a match that could have easily went to five, and you'd be forgiven to wonder just how hurt could he have really been.

Like I said, I think Nadal would probably have went on to win that tournament even with the knees if he doesn't face Soderling that particular day. However, tennis matches are often decided by the slimmest of margins. Nadal's movement being hampered and not being able to defend as well as he normally does, on clay, against an opponent in the zone and firing on all cylinders is a major deal breaker for him, and can be the difference between winning or losing.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Personally, I'll take this amount of concession from you that injury contributed to the loss. There's no reason to take away from Soderling's performance that day, and I don't think anyone does. That upset and the one over Roger the next year are two of the highlights of his sadly shortened career. It bears remembering that Soderling beat Nadal in the 4th round that year, so I don't know if anyone is arguing that had Nadal gotten past Soderling, he'd have won the tournament. His knees were bad. As you say, Darth, probably made worse by that match. It's an attritional injury. Personally, I don't think he'd have made it to the final, anyway. If he had, I think it's fair to think that Roger would likely have picked him off. Ironically, Fed fans should be almost sorry that Soderling won, as Roger would likely have gotten that scalp over Rafa at RG. We'd still be arguing over the state of the knees, but it would be in terms of Federer win, not a Soderling one. Now there's an alternate universe for you to contemplate.

Soderling went on to play Davydenko and Gonzalez before reaching the final. Davydenko might have been Nadal's worst ever match-up on hards (except maybe from an in-the-zone Novak), but on clay he was more or less an easy customer. I would have been shocked if he beats Nadal at Roland Garros, especially with him being so undersized. Gonzalez and his one handed backhand would have been toast against any version of Nadal on clay.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,608
Reactions
14,768
Points
113
Soderling went on to play Davydenko and Gonzalez before reaching the final. Davydenko might have been Nadal's worst ever match-up on hards (except maybe from an in-the-zone Novak), but on clay he was more or less an easy customer. I would have been shocked if he beats Nadal at Roland Garros, especially with him being so undersized. Gonzalez and his one handed backhand would have been toast against any version of Nadal on clay.
I did actually revisit the potential rest of the draw. And I know that Davydenko was only a threat on HCs, though maybe a trouble, taking the ball early, in these circumstances. Anyway, I did say that Rafa might well have gotten to Roger. With his knees in such bad shape, and they'd only have gotten worse in 3 more rounds, I don't know if match-up and psychology would have been enough to get Rafa the win over Roger, should they have made that final. As it was, when he did lose, his tendons were ripped, and had large hematomae on them. They were almost literally hanging on by a thread. For that reason, I'm not convinced he's have made it though the whole draw, anyway.
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
22,952
Reactions
3,896
Points
113
I did actually revisit the potential rest of the draw. And I know that Davydenko was only a threat on HCs, though maybe a trouble, taking the ball early, in these circumstances. Anyway, I did say that Rafa might well have gotten to Roger. With his knees in such bad shape, and they'd only have gotten worse in 3 more rounds, I don't know if match-up and psychology would have been enough to get Rafa the win over Roger, should they have made that final. As it was, when he did lose, his tendons were ripped, and had large hematomae on them. They were almost literally hanging on by a thread. For that reason, I'm not convinced he's have made it though the whole draw, anyway.

Hope you realize it's massively over exaggerated posts like this that get on the nerves of non Nadal fans. How in the name of Odin's beard could he have made the semifinals of the 2009 USO just 2 months after Wimbledon if his tendons were basically hanging on by a thread at RG (which incidentally is not possible if you look at some of the balls he ran down there against Soderling) ? Fact: Nadal has NEVER had knee surgery and if his knees were even 1% as bad as the Nadal camp make out (they clearly weren't) then there's absolutely zero chance of him reaching the semis of the USO just 2 months later. From the way you lot go on about his knee problems Darth is right, it's made out like he was crippled.

Federer had surgery and took half the year off. Nadal apparently had "tendons hanging on by a thread" and makes the semis of the USO 2 months later. Hmmm. Ponder that and ask yourself how bad could his injury possibly have been. Wear and tear and a bit of pain was all that was 'cos what you're describing above couldn't possibly be better in 2 months...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Federberg

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
Hope you realize it's massively over exaggerated posts like this that get on the nerves of non Nadal fans. How in the name of Odin's beard could he have made the semifinals of the 2009 USO just 2 months after Wimbledon if his tendons were basically hanging on by a thread at RG (which incidentally is not possible if you look at some of the balls he ran down there against Soderling) ? Fact: Nadal has NEVER had knee surgery and if his knees were even 1% as bad as the Nadal camp make out (they clearly weren't) then there's absolutely zero chance of him reaching the semis of the USO just 2 months later. From the way you lot go on about his knee problems Darth is right, it's made out like he was crippled.

Federer had surgery and took half the year off. Nadal apparently had "tendons hanging on by a thread" and makes the semis of the USO 2 months later. Hmmm. Ponder that and ask yourself how bad could his injury possibly have been. Wear and tear and a bit of pain was all that was 'cos what you're describing above couldn't possibly be better in 2 months...

I think I can summarise things like this. "Rafa's the best. If he loses it's only because he's injured. And it doesn't matter if he's running around like a jack-rabbit. The fact that you can't see it is because you're biased against him!" :lol6:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Front242

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,608
Reactions
14,768
Points
113
This is an article written at the time, from The Guardian. Perhaps they exaggerate, as well.
 

Front242

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
22,952
Reactions
3,896
Points
113
This is an article written at the time, from The Guardian. Perhaps they exaggerate, as well.

100% they do as he won how many slams since then?! And made the US semis 2 months later as I said. Big load of crud of epic proportions.
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,117
Reactions
5,768
Points
113
Holy hyperbole, Moxie. This is not a player whose tendons are hanging on by a thread:



He's moving pretty well. What is most striking is how great Soderling is playing. He looks like Stanimal.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
Well done mate! I should have thought to post that. You watch that and wonder how anyone can come up with all this injury crap. It's there for all to see. Rafa was hitting short balls against a guy who was absolutely crushing it. Please Rafa fans have the good grace to accept he lost fair and square. It doesn't speak well of you to perpetuate this myth. Look at the video!
 
  • Like
Reactions: El Dude

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Hope you realize it's massively over exaggerated posts like this that get on the nerves of non Nadal fans. How in the name of Odin's beard could he have made the semifinals of the 2009 USO just 2 months after Wimbledon if his tendons were basically hanging on by a thread at RG (which incidentally is not possible if you look at some of the balls he ran down there against Soderling) ? Fact: Nadal has NEVER had knee surgery and if his knees were even 1% as bad as the Nadal camp make out (they clearly weren't) then there's absolutely zero chance of him reaching the semis of the USO just 2 months later. From the way you lot go on about his knee problems Darth is right, it's made out like he was crippled.

Federer had surgery and took half the year off. Nadal apparently had "tendons hanging on by a thread" and makes the semis of the USO 2 months later. Hmmm. Ponder that and ask yourself how bad could his injury possibly have been. Wear and tear and a bit of pain was all that was 'cos what you're describing above couldn't possibly be better in 2 months...

He took TWO WHOLE MONTHS off to rest. What's so difficult to understand? I don't agree with Moxie that his knees were THAT shot by the way. If they were, he would have been out for 7 months the way he was in 2012 (or as you would call it, a silent ban), not 9 weeks, but the idea that him reaching the US Open semis (what a result, he should have gotten a trophy for it! Let's ignore how Del Potro destroyed him by the way...) somehow implies his knee issue wasn't serious at RG/Wimbledon is a joke.

FYI, Nadal lost to Soderling at Roland Garros on May 31. He lost to Del Potro at the US Open on September 13. That's well over THREE MONTHS LATER.

With logic like this you shouldn't call out Nadal fans for "getting on the nerves of anyone." So please, everyone, let's stop calling out fanbases and agree that they all have their problems and admit we're all biased (the fact that a fellow Fed fan liked your post shows how programmed we are for confirmation bias).
 
Last edited:

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
I think I can summarise things like this. "Rafa's the best. If he loses it's only because he's injured. And it doesn't matter if he's running around like a jack-rabbit. The fact that you can't see it is because you're biased against him!" :lol6:

Oooooooooooooooooooor, and hear me out, I know this might sound crazy, but you can bother to respond the actual arguments that were laid out relatively objectively and give your own point of view instead of posting something that's more or less worthless. I like you buddy, you know that, but if you guys want to discuss a particular subject, do it, instead of ignoring whatever arguments are presented and resort to ironic statements such as the one above. If you were debating Carol, I'd understand, but that's not the case.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Well done mate! I should have thought to post that. You watch that and wonder how anyone can come up with all this injury crap. It's there for all to see. Rafa was hitting short balls against a guy who was absolutely crushing it. Please Rafa fans have the good grace to accept he lost fair and square. It doesn't speak well of you to perpetuate this myth. Look at the video!

By the way, the way you dodged the quote I provided you in which Soderling's own coach pretty much stated that Nadal wasn't moving well in 2009 (sorry, he said he was moving "much better in 2010," which is not the same thing at all of course...) is amazing. And you guys dare calling out other fanbases.

Also, are you honestly saying the injury is a myth? Did he get injured on his way home? Perhaps while waiting for the cab? Or was he not at all injured and pulled out of Wimbledon to give credence to the theory? The match made his knees worse? Possible. But did he only feel the effects the day after? Just asking for a friend.

Also, playing with discomfort does not mean the match was not fair and square. Both guys stepped on the court and one guy won. No cheating was involved. Unless of course, you believe @Front242 and his historical accusations about Nadal being a steroid user. But yeah, you're right, Nadal fans are bad (they are though, to be honest. Same goes for every other fanbase. It's just that we're all living in glass houses and throw stones like there's no tomorrow, completely oblivious. It's hilarious).
 

El Dude

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,117
Reactions
5,768
Points
113
Broken, take a gander at that highlights video I posted. Do you see any visual sign of impairment for Nadal? I don't ask as a challenge, more curiosity.

By the way, I'm not saying that he wasn't hurting, I just don't see any sign of impairment. If he was in pain that could have impacted his performance, but it just looks like he was moving fine and either playing through the pain and/or not feeling it due to adrenaline, or maybe not even in pain at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Front242

Carol

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
9,225
Reactions
1,833
Points
113
Oooooooooooooooooooor, and hear me out, I know this might sound crazy, but you can bother to respond the actual arguments that were laid out relatively objectively and give your own point of view instead of posting something that's more or less worthless. I like you buddy, you know that, but if you guys want to discuss a particular subject, do it, instead of ignoring whatever arguments are presented and resort to ironic statements such as the one above. If you were debating Carol, I'd understand, but that's not the case.
It seems this thread is not improving and neither some posters like you. If you think to have certain logic like usually I have is something dumb then it means that you are not too smart. You are debating Federer's fans something that was very clear at that time though it is very convenient for them to believe that Nadal was healthy but he lost to a player who played excellent but not enough good to beat Federer who could win his first and last RG. So according to them Nadal got hurted after that match when he was boarding the plane in his way to Wimbledon and that was the reason he couldn’t defend his title and had to be out of the court fot almost three months
Bottom line, tell me who in this board is giving better arguments, who is right or wrong and more important who is more objective before to pronounce my name, mr.bronkeshoelace aka “the wiser poster” if you understand what means sarcasm....
 
Last edited:

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Broken, take a gander at that highlights video I posted. Do you see any visual sign of impairment for Nadal? I don't ask as a challenge, more curiosity.

By the way, I'm not saying that he wasn't hurting, I just don't see any sign of impairment. If he was in pain that could have impacted his performance, but it just looks like he was moving fine and either playing through the pain and/or not feeling it due to adrenaline, or maybe not even in pain at all.

No that's a fair question, and it at least attempts to start an constructive conversation.

"Impairment" is a term I won't use because the Fedfan police might get on my case but I'll say that yes, I clearly see signs of Nadal not moving like his usual self. Now to clarify, especially when it comes to Nadal, the barometer for me personally, as to how well he's moving, is not the occasional burst of explosiveness when he's chasing down a ball. That's something he still has even today, despite not being nearly the same mover he was in say, 2006 (makes sense, obviously. It's over a decade later). What I look for is how early/late he's getting to balls that aren't stretching him out too much, particularly how he's moving to the forehand side.

Now, the above are merely highlights, so by definition they're nit-picking. I can only do the same, and yes you can claim what I'm about to point towards is only one point, but keep in mind, I am merely selecting that point to better explain what I mean when I say he wasn't moving well, not as some sort of irrefutable evidence.

Take a look at the point which starts at 8:01. On the third shot of the rally Soderling hits a down the line backhand that isn't necessarily meant to be a winner. Nadal has to stretch and put on a defensive slice back. That's the sort of stuff you rarely see with Nadal during his clay court heyday. However, that to me, is actually NOT necessarily a sign of poor movement. I think that actually speaks more to Soderling's shot selection and strategy keeping him guessing and planting doubt in his head, as he was likely anticipating a cross court backhand (nevertheless, I'd still say Nadal was slow to react). Much more telling however, is the final shot of that same rally. Soderling hits a decent down the line forehand, admittedly with some depth, but he wasn't going for a winner and it was simply a rally shot. Nadal isn't even caught off guard, but is so slow getting to the ball that he actually has to slide into it and still gets there very late. Nadal's ensuing forehand isn't even close to going over the net. How Nadal moves to his forehand side is always the main indicator to me personally with regards to his movement.

Now, I actually didn't go through the entire highlights, but I've watched that match enough times to be able to find you other similar examples if you wish. I am fully aware it is ludicrous to use one point as some sort of conclusive evidence. My point is actually that the match was filled with similar points from Nadal's perspective. I had never seen him slide so early to his forehand side on clay up until that point. That's the thing about Nadal at the time -- unless he was just completely chasing the ball trying to hit a squash shot/passing shot/defensive lob from his forehand side, he didn't slide that early for routine forehands.

I said as much at the time (I wish the old forum archive was still around), but I thought Nadal was moving below par dating back to Madrid (the Novak match from that tournament, which I'm sure did Nadal's knees no favors as it was the longest ever best of 3 set match, is a very good example of Nadal's movement being iffy).
 
  • Like
Reactions: El Dude