Western & Southern Open - Cincinnati (Men)

[Kieran]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

Tignor also praised Lopez highly:

Lopez had won their previous meeting, last year in Shanghai, and he obviously hadn’t forgotten that fact. In Cincy, he competed with Rafa on level terms, and never gave off the sense, as he has before, that it was going to end badly for him. It was Lopez, for example, who came up with the shot of the match, a slingshot crosscourt forehand winner in the waning moments that Nadal could only watch. It was Lopez who moved exceptionally well and seemed to read Rafa’s every idea. And it was Lopez who clamped down with his serve when it mattered most, in the third-set tiebreaker.

Feli hit 43 winners and never wavered in his belief that he could win. Rafa's still in his rut - but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well? :cover :dodgy:

 

[Kieran]

Is it just me or there somebody else out there giving Gasquet a shot? I changed completely my mind about him in the last months (even if based only on two matches, and, of course, the results in general).

Also, I think he will qualify for London, even if he is still some 1000 points behind the #8 spot).

Well, he was hugely impressive at Wimbledon, the way he won tight and tense matches with Nick and Stan. I wouldn't completely write him off against Andy, because Murray might also have a hangover from his long match yesterday, but I'd still give Andy the nod. But it wouldn't surprise me if Andy doesn't play so well, though, and Richard takes it...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

Obviously you have not read one word of what I wrote specifically for you in my last post...But whatever makes you happy.

 

[Carol]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

Tignor also praised Lopez highly:

Lopez had won their previous meeting, last year in Shanghai, and he obviously hadn’t forgotten that fact. In Cincy, he competed with Rafa on level terms, and never gave off the sense, as he has before, that it was going to end badly for him. It was Lopez, for example, who came up with the shot of the match, a slingshot crosscourt forehand winner in the waning moments that Nadal could only watch.
It was Lopez who moved exceptionally well and seemed to read Rafa’s every idea. And it was Lopez who clamped down with his serve when it mattered most, in the third-set tiebreaker.

Feli hit 43 winners and never wavered in his belief that he could win. Rafa's still in his rut - but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well? :cover :dodgy:

And I repeat, Tignor has not been the ONLY ONE, even if Rafa was playing like 'crap'

 

[Carol]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

Obviously you have not read one word of what I wrote specifically for you in my last post...But whatever makes you happy.

I've read it......two wins on HC and one on carpet by Feli are a bunch of wins? really? :nono

 

[mrzz]

Feli hit 43 winners and never wavered in his belief that he could win. Rafa's still in his rut - but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well? :cover :dodgy:

But there's a difference between playing well and being a world beater. The guy is #23 in the world, he is supposed to play well once in a while, specially on a surface that suits his game.

 

[Kieran]

Feli hit 43 winners and never wavered in his belief that he could win. Rafa's still in his rut - but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well? :cover :dodgy:

But there's a difference between playing well and being a world beater. The guy is #23 in the world, he is supposed to play well once in a while, specially on a surface that suits his game.

And he did. I don't see why people are getting their knickers in a knot because Carol is praising him. If she came out didn't praise him, they'd be accusing her of sour grapes. I see this trend towards bragging and gloating over every Rafa defeat from people who've been waiting a while to do this. I don't mind that, but Carol actually praised his opponent and faces a witch-hunt over it? :cover

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

Obviously you have not read one word of what I wrote specifically for you in my last post...But whatever makes you happy.

I've read it......two wins on HC and one on carpet by Feli are a bunch of wins? really? :nono

That was not even the point! The point is the MATCH UPS!!!! Your favorite player lost to Davydenko more than he won, on the other hand federer is 19-2 against him, but Nadal is 23-10 against Roger...Why?

 

[Kieran]

Obviously you have not read one word of what I wrote specifically for you in my last post...But whatever makes you happy.

I've read it......two wins on HC and one on carpet by Feli are a bunch of wins? really? :nono

That was not even the point! The point is the MATCH UPS!!!! Your favorite player lost to Davydenko more than he won, on the other hand federer is 19-2 against him, but Nadal is 23-10 against Roger...Why?

Wait a sec, are you saying Feli is a bad match up for Rafa, and that's why he won? Am I missing something here? I could be...

 

[DarthFed]

Ok EVERYBODY, I've never said that Rafa played wonderfull, I said that I've never seen Feli playing so well, serving, hitting, on the net, running , baseline, etc etc, he did everything well. I KNOW that if Rafa would have play his best he never would have lost that match but that awful tb was his end giving more strength and confidence to his opponent who was playing superb
IF he plays so well today he will beat Federer (who is not playing his best either) but I don't think he could be able to repeat it :nono or maybe yes?

It's not about you pointing out that Lopez played great, it just is amusing that almost every time Rafa loses you say that the other guy would've beaten anyone else in the world too so Rafa is just unlucky. And saying that about Lopez is just living in lala land. Great returners like Nole and Murray will always eat him alive and he should not be breaking Roger's serve more than once in a blue moon.

I actually like Lopez, he has a decently big game and has done well considering his backhand is probably worse than some high school players. But he should not be beating any of the top guys...and Rafa just simply isn't playing anything close to elite tennis right now. Losses this year to Lopez, Brown, Fognini, your next door neighbor, etc. should prove that.

 

[pavlik89]

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLiDfRhGf8k[/video]

 

[nehmeth]

but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well?

Nothing is wrong with pointing out he played well. I also stated the same, previously

I liked what Tignor wrote and agreed. But... that was not her claim.

...if you have some knowledge about this sport you can't deny that Feli played better than anyone else. And I'm not the only one saying that, all the good tennis followers, including commentarists, writers and experts have said the same thing.

I simply asked for a link verifying her above claims. Maybe you can show her how to post a link and why it's good to do it.

 

[mrzz]

I see your point, Kieran. Maybe what people feel a bit too much is the already given explanation of future facts. Lopez beats Nadal because he would beat anyone (which is debatable to say the least, even if I obviously agree that he played well), but he will loose to Federer because he won't repeat the performance (and the fact that Federer dispatched a monster server with some vintage shots is irrelevant). You cannot argue with that... so enters the witch-hunt.

But, in fairness, Murat assessed her views directly and was very far from witch-hunt, I would guess.

 

[Kieran]

but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well?

Nothing is wrong with pointing out he played well. I also stated the same, previously

I liked what Tignor wrote and agreed. But... that was not her claim.

...if you have some knowledge about this sport you can't deny that Feli played better than anyone else. And I'm not the only one saying that, all the good tennis followers, including commentarists, writers and experts have said the same thing.

I simply asked for a link verifying her above claims. Maybe you can show her how to post a link and why it's good to do it.

If she was to post links to "all" good commentators, etc, the site would crash. Anyway, it was an excessive remark, which everyone makes occasionally, but not one that was a pointed lie. I'm not sure I'm getting why you're over-reacting. Did any commentators say Lopez played poorly? The couple I easily found on Google said the same as Tignor, with one citing the amount of winners.

You were the same the other day with Fiero when he said Sampras got a WC from Becker to enter Paris Indoors in 1998. But Fiero was only wrong in the tournament, because it was Vienna, not Paris, where Becker gave Pete his WC. You could have googled it just as easy yourself, without slagging off Fiero, who was correct in his point, even if he remembered the details wrongly...

 

[Fiero425]

Whatever! At least you could do your own research unlike some others! Make me a liar over the event from over 15 years ago! Stay dim; I won't bother trying to inform! So many said it didn't happen at all! Gawd save us! ;-(

 

[Riotbeard]

but what's wrong with pointing out that Feli played well?

Nothing is wrong with pointing out he played well. I also stated the same, previously

I liked what Tignor wrote and agreed. But... that was not her claim.

...if you have some knowledge about this sport you can't deny that Feli played better than anyone else. And I'm not the only one saying that, all the good tennis followers, including commentarists, writers and experts have said the same thing.

I simply asked for a link verifying her above claims. Maybe you can show her how to post a link and why it's good to do it.

To be fair, the overall conceit of Tignor's article wasn't the argument that Feli played well thus Rafa lost. Instead, he was saying that players approach Rafa with far more confidence, because he isn't play well, so a guy like Feli, who would have been scared before walking on the court a couple years ago, now approaches Rafa with confidence. So of course Feli played well and Tignor says that, but the larger point was that everybody knows Rafa is beatable now, and players approach him just like any other player.

In short, while Tignor praised Feli, you could pretty easily read that Tignor does not think Feli would have been nearly as successful against a top 5 player.

On sources, I think it's one thing when you are giving your opinion, no link required, but when you are of the stating things as fact (that might not be) "like everyone is saying Feli was unbeatable that day" (when in the case of Tignor, he was saying the opposite), a link or two might be nice, if you want your point to be taken seriously.

What I saw of the match, Feli looked good, but hardly like he might make a run into the top 5.

 

[Kieran]

Whatever! At least you could do your own research unlike some others! Make me a liar over the event from over 15 years ago! Stay dim; I won't bother trying to inform! So many said it didn't happen at all! Gawd save us! ;-(

Hey! I was defending you! :laydownlaughing

 

[Fiero425]

Whatever! At least you could do your own research unlike some others! Make me a liar over the event from over 15 years ago! Stay dim; I won't bother trying to inform! So many said it didn't happen at all! Gawd save us! ;-(

Hey! I was defending you! :laydownlaughing

With that kind of "late" defense, I don't need any detractors! :cover uzzled :nono :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I've read it......two wins on HC and one on carpet by Feli are a bunch of wins? really? :nono

That was not even the point! The point is the MATCH UPS!!!! Your favorite player lost to Davydenko more than he won, on the other hand federer is 19-2 against him, but Nadal is 23-10 against Roger...Why?

Wait a sec, are you saying Feli is a bad match up for Rafa, and that's why he won? Am I missing something here? I could be...

No man, just look at the matches Lopez won against Rafa and on what surface they were played on, and look at Lopez's style. Looking at everything, those wins are NOT shocking. But that just does not apply to a Lopez-federer match. Because Roger uses that surface better than Lopez, hence the H2H.

 

[Fiero425]

That was not even the point! The point is the MATCH UPS!!!! Your favorite player lost to Davydenko more than he won, on the other hand federer is 19-2 against him, but Nadal is 23-10 against Roger...Why?

Wait a sec, are you saying Feli is a bad match up for Rafa, and that's why he won? Am I missing something here? I could be...

No man, just look at the matches Lopez won against Rafa and on what surface they were played on, and look at Lopez's style. Looking at everything, those wins are NOT shocking. But that just does not apply to a Lopez-federer match. Because Roger uses that surface better than Lopez, hence the H2H.

Lopez is still a head case! He can give it all back in a flash! I still faintly remember him being up in the 3rd set of a clay event; maybe the 3rd round of Madrid where Roger was down 2-5 in the TB! Deliciamo butchered an overhead at the net and preceded to allow Federer to come back and win it, something like 11-9! Sometimes they just can't finish; sorta like Grigor last night against Andy! :cover :nono :angel: :dodgy: