The Ultimate FEDAL (Wars) Thread

[Moxie]

Rafa's humility is not natural and learned and coached by his team. In 2006, I remember a
distinct interview before RG in 2006 in which Rafa said there is no way that Roger can beat me in RG.
He said, if he (Fed) wanted to beat me, he could have beat me in Dubai, he did not; if he wanted to beat me, he could have beat me in Rome, he did not; there is no way that he is going to beat
me in RG (Of course, he backed up his talk by walking the walk).

I have already mentioned this before in this forum. But, unfortunately I cannot provide
a link to that interview as it is so long ago. But, I listened to the above statements made
in Rafa's own voice on NPR while driving somewhere in 2006.

I'm pretty sure that's not really kosher, GSM, to say you remember a quote that you can't find and still use it out of your memory to prove your point. Not only does it not sound like Nadal, it doesn't sound like NPR. Read/listen to this example from May 31, 2006, which is probably as close as you'll get to it anyway. They don't play tape or quote any players, just Frank de Ford and Steve Innskeep talking and giving analysis. This is their standard format.

I did find this from the Guardian from 2006, with regards to Rafa saying that next year he might be able to beat Federer there. Perhaps you were remembering some version of this quote:

"I saw in the match when I was playing my best tennis, when I was playing good, the match is close, very close. Not much difference, no? So that's good, that's nice for me," said Nadal. "The title is for him, so that's the real thing now, but we gonna see. We gonna see. I want to improve. I am 20. He is 24. So maybe, maybe in the future I can improve."


But it is very different than Rafa bragging about being able to beat Roger before the end of RG, since in terms of Wimbledon he would be speaking as the underdog, and yet still some good youthful swagger and hope for improvement. Not actually inconsistent for Nadal, I don't think.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I am talking about RG and not Wimby. I agree that I am guilty of not providing an appropriate link to support my claim. I will try to dig in when I get some free time this summer to actually find a link to prove that I am not making things up here to tarnish Rafa.

Having said that as I already mentioned, I do not have a problem with a player A saying before the match that they will beat player B (independent of whether they actually beat them in the
said match or not). In fact, I would like them to do so. If it goes to low level thrash talking it may
be in bad taste. But, just a general expression of your genuine opinion is not something to be chastised, IMHO. Rafa certainly did not trash talk Roger even in 2006. But, I do believe that he
expressed his genuine opinion that Roger cannot beat him at RG before RG tourney started
(and as all of we know he walked the walk as well) and I don't have a problem with that either.
The only reason I am mentioning is that he "learnt/got coached" to be extremely humble
when talking about Roger in press conferences since then.

 

[Front242]

^ Nadal did say that as I distinctly recall it. I'll try and find it later on.

 

[the AntiPusher]

^ Nadal did say that as I distinctly recall it. I'll try and find it later on.

Front , does everything little thing that Rafa says matters , why is it such a need to villianfy this, tennis player

 

[Kieran]

So what if he said it? Federer said this, Rafa said that. As GSM says, it's not a bad thing. I agree with that. I prefer that stuff to the humblebrag, as well. I wish we saw more of it...

 

[Carol]

If we would start to say what every player has said...... we never finish!!!!

 

[Moxie]

If we would start to say what every player has said...... we never finish!!!!

We DO rake over everything Nadal and Federer have ever said...and we never finish! :snicker :laydownlaughing

@GSM: I don't mind if he said it, either. But we can't debate a quote from someone's memory. I couldn't find it. I offered something similar from that period of time, which was relative to Wimbledon, I realize, but it was the closest I could find. If you do retrieve it, let us know, just out of curiosity.

 

[mrzz]

@GSM: I don't mind if he said it, either. But we can't debate a quote from someone's memory.

I obviously see your point, Moxie, but this is not a court of law. We can debate it, if we trust this someone (not only his word but also his memory, and even his source). But if the person is positive that he actually heard the player saying so and so... it is almost offensive to simply dismiss it (and I know it is not your intention).

Course, people can make mistakes, so if a source is shown, less room for error. But simply dismiss someone's information because the source can't be found is a bit too much. This is a very civilized forum (you don't see people calling each other f$%%îng idiots and so on) and we can make this leap of faith (in most cases), keeping in mind the possible mistakes people can do. Maybe I did not express myself perfectly, but I guess you got my point.

 

[Moxie]

@GSM: I don't mind if he said it, either. But we can't debate a quote from someone's memory.

I obviously see your point, Moxie, but this is not a court of law. We can debate it, if we trust this someone (not only his word but also his memory, and even his source). But if the person is positive that he actually heard the player saying so and so... it is almost offensive to simply dismiss it (and I know it is not your intention).

Course, people can make mistakes, so if a source is shown, less room for error. But simply dismiss someone's information because the source can't be found is a bit too much. This is a very civilized forum (you don't see people calling each other f$%%îng idiots and so on) and we can make this leap of faith (in most cases), keeping in mind the possible mistakes people can do. Maybe I did not express myself perfectly, but I guess you got my point.

This is not a court of law, but we do require a minimum of reasonable proof for debate, which I think is fair. I don't see how it is offensive to ask for citation, when someone claims a quote. We don't think anyone is lying, but memory is a fallible thing. If one wants to debate a quote, they should be able to cite it. Of course we all debate based on impressions and vagaries, but if we want to make a strong point, we have to have a proof.

 

[Federberg]

http://www.tennisworldusa.org/how-federer-djokovic-and-nadal-made-clay-court-tournaments-so-predictable-articolo23676.html?

 

[Carol]

"I know I can beat him on any surface", Federer eating of his ego after losing to Nadal in the FO semis....

 

[Kieran]

"I know I can beat him on any surface", Federer eating of his ego after losing to Nadal in the FO semis....

And he has! It's a statement of intent that's also a fact...

 

[Carol]

"I know I can beat him on any surface", Federer eating of his ego after losing to Nadal in the FO semis....

And he has! It's a statement of intent that's also a fact...

Federer said that, not Nadal

 

[Kieran]

"I know I can beat him on any surface", Federer eating of his ego after losing to Nadal in the FO semis....

And he has! It's a statement of intent that's also a fact...

Federer said that, not Nadal

I know, and he was right, that's what I'm saying. He was honest in his assessment...

 

[Carol]

And he has! It's a statement of intent that's also a fact...

Federer said that, not Nadal

I know, and he was right, that's what I'm saying. He was honest in his assessment...

Sorry but I don't think he was right, he would have showed that he was able to beat him on any surface (several times)and then to say that later :huh:

 

[Front242]

Federer said that, not Nadal

I know, and he was right, that's what I'm saying. He was honest in his assessment...

Sorry but I don't think he was right, he would have showed that he was able to beat him on any surface (several times)and then to say that later :huh:

Er...he has :cover It's true he can beat him on any surface and not anything close to what GSM mentioned Nadal said years ago (note difference between I know I can beat him and there is no chance he can beat me. Which guy sounds more like a pretentious tosser to you?!) before uncle phony started to clean up Rafa's act to the stuff we hear these days which he's been conditioned to say like a robot and which isn't his own personality but force fed politically correct garbage.

 

[Carol]

I know, and he was right, that's what I'm saying. He was honest in his assessment...

Sorry but I don't think he was right, he would have showed that he was able to beat him on any surface (several times)and then to say that later :huh:

Er...he has :cover It's true he can beat him on any surface and not anything close to what GSM mentioned Nadal said years ago (note difference between I know I can beat him and there is no chance chance he can beat me. Which guy sounds more like a pretentious tosser to you?!) before uncle phony started to clean up Rafa's act to the stuff we hear these days which he's been conditioned to say like a robot and which isn't his own personality but force fed politically correct garbage.

Anyone can beat anyone anytime an on any surface but the big diference is how many times someone can beat to the other, isn't?
And by the way I don't believe that Nadal said that in that way, it sounds a little bit twister of what really he said

 

[Front242]

What's your point exactly? We all know Nadal is better than everyone on clay. He's not better on other surfaces so, again, what's your point?

 

[Carol]

What's your point exactly? We all know Nadal is better than everyone on clay. He's not better on other surfaces so, again, what's your point?

My point is that Nadal has beaten Federer on any surface besides on clay, am I right?

 

[Federberg]

What's your point exactly? We all know Nadal is better than everyone on clay. He's not better on other surfaces so, again, what's your point?

My point is that Nadal has beaten Federer on any surface besides on clay, am I right?

I think you're trolling. Behave yourself...