Which has been greater at the US Open: Nadal's overachieving or Djokovic's/Federer's underachieving?

[Andy22]

Almost every tournament in the news after he pulled out they were announcing he'd be back and then he'd pull out and same the following week. Something doesn't add up there and Nadal fans know it.

nadal pulled out Shanghai masters luckily for Federer because he would have easy beat him playing way higher level than Federer this season, not to worry bro Federer still going to get owned by Djokovic, thiem Medvedev.

 

[Front242]

nadal pulled out Shanghai masters luckily for Federer because he would have easy beat him playing way higher level than Federer this season, not to worry bro Federer still going to get owned by Djokovic, thiem Medvedev.

Get help and while you're at it go back watch the last match between Federer and Nadal at Shanghai. Nadal hasn't beaten Federer on any surface except clay since 2014 at the AO and the court was dog slow that year so it was no surprise. You have absolutely nothing to base Nadal easily beating Federer off clay other than sheer wishful thinking.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Almost every tournament in the news after he pulled out they were announcing he'd be back and then he'd pull out and same the following week. Something doesn't add up there and Nadal fans know it.

No honestly you’re the only person delusional enough to think they “know” this.

 

[Ricardo]

WHAT.THE.FUCK????? :lulz2:

Did you seriously just say this to me? That I'm the one using resumes instead of the match that was played?

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. First of all, that's not even my argument, but you're the one who has been saying to me that I am, in essence, looking too much into one match between Nadal and Medvedev and not appreciating how daunting a challenge it supposedly was for Medvedev precisely because of Nadal's resume. So this is a rich accusation coming from you all of people.

That said, if you do want to talk resumes, as of that day Federer had won 5 US Opens and 3 Australian Opens, while Nadal had never won a hardcourt Slam. So using your resume-is-king logic, my argument only becomes stronger.

But regarding the actual play on the court (which is my concern), Federer clearly had more game on hardcourts but was approaching Nadal all wrong, especially with his return of serve. That's the point I am making. And yes, you can look at "the match that was played" and see what I am saying.

take it easy on her, you just made her squirt again.

 

[Andy22]

Get help and while you're at it go back watch the last match between Federer and Nadal at Shanghai. Nadal hasn't beaten Federer on any surface except clay since 2014 at the AO and the court was dog slow that year so it was no surprise. You have absolutely nothing to base Nadal easily beating Federer off clay other than sheer wishful thinking.

nadal owned federer everywhere before 2017 but anyway Djokovic the monkey on Federer back right now has not beaten Djokovic since 2015+lost 5 matches in a row, so basically Federer is Djokovic doormat.

 

[calitennis127]

Federer could have gotten down on his knees and prayed in case God could help him but otherwise no. Nadal was too fast and was a perfect combination of offense and defense. Nadal also beat Federer at the 2012 and 2014 AO even more convincingly. When Federer finally beat him in the 2017 AO it took him a miracle at the end.

Lol.....this is the kind of ridiculous thinking that so many Nadal fans actually believe. If you want to say that Nadal covered the court phenomenally well that tournament and did some major damage with his forehand against Verdasco and Federer, fine. But to say Nadal was just flat out too good and "a perfect combination of offense and defense"?

That is beyond delusional.

Federer's ROS games (which the highlight reels obviously don't show) were simply horrendous. Darren Cahill among others pointed it out during the match. It was so awful you could not ignore it. To say Federer could not have handled that better simply is not rational. He had all the skills necessary to do much better than that and be more creative but he failed to adjust effectively.

Look at the two sets Federer won - they were both 6-3. Look at the first two of four sets Nadal won - 7-5 and 7-6. So even with Nadal playing his best Australian Open ever and Federer self-destructing in front of everyone's eyes, Federer still won two straightforward sets while Nadal had to eek through two tight ones - again, even with Nadal at his best and Federer imploding.

That should tell you who has more natural game on hardcourts.

 

[calitennis127]

nadal owned federer everywhere before 2017 but anyway Djokovic the monkey on Federer back right now has not beaten Djokovic since 2015+lost 5 matches in a row, so basically Federer is Djokovic doormat.

Just like Nadal is at all hardcourt events except his gadget playground in Flushing Meadows.

 

[Moxie]

WHAT.THE.FUCK????? :lulz2:

Did you seriously just say this to me? That I'm the one using resumes instead of the match that was played?

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. First of all, that's not even my argument, but you're the one who has been saying to me that I am, in essence, looking too much into one match between Nadal and Medvedev and not appreciating how daunting a challenge it supposedly was for Medvedev precisely because of Nadal's resume. So this is a rich accusation coming from you all of people.

That said, if you do want to talk resumes, as of that day Federer had won 5 US Opens and 3 Australian Opens, while Nadal had never won a hardcourt Slam. So using your resume-is-king logic, my argument only becomes stronger.

But regarding the actual play on the court (which is my concern), Federer clearly had more game on hardcourts but was approaching Nadal all wrong, especially with his return of serve. That's the point I am making. And yes, you can look at "the match that was played" and see what I am saying.

No, the point you were making is still his general purposes game, not the game he played that day. I'm not really convinced how much you know about Medvedev's game, in general. You merely kept trying to argue how close he came to winning, but for "blowing" a couple of break points in the 5th." Still, in both cases you're arguing who you think "should" have won. Nadal won both of those matches, so I am the only one talking about the match as it was played. You're talking matches that people lost, but trying to shore up your position (of wishful thinking) that they should have won, because of their resumes.

 

[Front242]

nadal owned federer everywhere before 2017 but anyway Djokovic the monkey on Federer back right now has not beaten Djokovic since 2015+lost 5 matches in a row, so basically Federer is Djokovic doormat.

So if Federer is Djokovic's door mat that must make Nadal his toilet paper the way he shits on him these days besides clay. Same as Federer beating Nadal like a drum off clay since 2014. Cheer up though, the WTF is coming up soon and Nadal will easily beat everyone there. Or wait.... nah. Not likely sorry.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

So if Federer is Djokovic's door mat that must make Nadal his toilet paper the way he shits on him these days besides clay. Same as Federer beating Nadal like a drum off clay since 2014. Cheer up though, the WTF is coming up soon and Nadal will easily beat everyone there. Or wait.... nah. Not likely sorry.

Toilet paper? Has Federer ever beaten Nadal in a slam for two consecutive times? :scratch:

And what is “off clay”? Do you live in a parallel universe where clay isn’t a Tennis surface?

 

[Front242]

Toilet paper? Has Federer ever beaten Nadal in a slam for two consecutive times? :scratch:

And what is “off clay”? Do you live in a parallel universe where Tennis surfaces are only hardcourt and grass?

No I don't and the fact is Nadal has beaten Federer just once since 2014 and it was on clay. That should show you that your supposed goat claims are a laughing stock.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

No I don't and the fact is Nadal has beaten Federer just once since 2014 and it was on clay. That should show you that your supposed goat claims are a laughing stock.

Keep living in La La Land and talking about clay and non-clay. :cuckoo:

And goat means all time not since 2017 or wherever Federer finally had a good run against Nadal.

 

[Front242]

Keep living in La La Land and talking about clay and non-clay. :cuckoo:

Good way to dodge the FACT that your bum chum has been whooped by a geriatric since 2014 besides 1 measly match which was played in horrendous conditions that favoured the less aggressive player on a slow ass court.

 

[Andy22]

So if Federer is Djokovic's door mat that must make Nadal his toilet paper the way he shits on him these days besides clay. Same as Federer beating Nadal like a drum off clay since 2014. Cheer up though, the WTF is coming up soon and Nadal will easily beat everyone there. Or wait.... nah. Not likely sorry.

good one funny man, will at least nadal beaten Djokovic on one surface instead 0 surfaces like Federer lol, also nadal beaten Djokovic three seasons in a row now [2017,18 19]. the last time Federer beat Djokovic it was the middle of the 2010s as well the fact Federer cant beat Djokovic on his favourite surface+ nadal can.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Good way to dodge the FACT that your bum chum has been whooped by a geriatric since 2014 besides 1 measly match which was played in horrendous conditions that favoured the less aggressive player on a slow ass court.

2014 Nadal beat Federer at the AO
2015 Federer beat Nadal at Basel
2016 no match
2017 the only great year of Federer against Nadal
2018 no match
2019 they split the matches at RG and WB

So like I said it's only 2017 that Federer had Nadal's number, but you make it seem "since 2014". Before then Nadal owned Federer for pretty much his whole career. GOAT doesn't mean GO2017, it means "all-time". So stop talking about 2017 or non clay.

 

[Andy22]

2014 Nadal beat Federer at the AO
2015 Federer beat Nadal at Basel
2016 no match
2017 the only great year of Federer against Nadal
2018 no match
2019 they split the matches at RG and WB

So like I said it's only 2017 that Federer had Nadal's number, but you make it seem "since 2014". Before then Nadal owned Federer for pretty much his whole career. GOAT doesn't mean GO2017, it means "all-time". So stop talking about 2017 or non clay.

Federer fans like to spin the facts to highly dumb levels] its like they live a dream world where Federer not 16-24 against nadal overall.

 

[calitennis127]

No, the point you were making is still his general purposes game, not the game he played that day.

Goodness gracious.....of course I am talking about his game that day. Federer demonstrated all the shots needed to thrash Nadal. Did you watch the match?

Moxie there are such things as strategic failures and underperforming. Not everything that is has to be. Someone who is 50 pounds overweight can change their fortunes. If they listened to you, they would just say "well, I ate all those potato chips and doughnuts every single night. It was the best I could do health-wise and now I am what I am. I'm not going to live in some alternative reality and say that I could have refrained from eating all that. I live in the real world like my friend Moxie where I simply have no choice but to be a fat fuck. That's who I am because that is the result of my choices. Hum-dee-dee-dum."

On that point, Federer simply did not play his best against Nadal. Period. There were so many things he could have easily done but did not - just as the overweight man could have resisted all those doughnuts and gone to the gym instead.

I'm not really convinced how much you know about Medvedev's game, in general.

Then go check out what I said right before the final as my take on the match. I said that Medvedev needed to use his offense to set up his defense, meaning take it to Nadal offensively a few times so that he could then force Nadal into errors during long rallies. My prescription was right on point in light of what happened during the match.

You merely kept trying to argue how close he came to winning, but for "blowing" a couple of break points in the 5th."

Exactly right.

You're talking matches that people lost, but trying to shore up your position (of wishful thinking) that they should have won, because of their resumes.

Lol.....I never said that Medvedev should have won because of his "resume." When did I say that? I may have said that his resume was good enough to not feel intimidated by the occasion, but that's totally different than saying someone has an outright better resume than the opponent.

 

[Andy22]

Since 2009 Nadal won( 5 )majors on hard courts while Federer only won (3) truth hurts for Federer fanboys but Nadal has been better than Federer on 2/3 surfaces( clay)( hard) in tennis for 11 years now.

 

[calitennis127]

Since 2009 Nadal won( 5 )majors on hard courts while Federer only won (3) truth hurts for Federer fanboys but Nadal has been better than Federer on 2/3 surfaces( clay)( hard) in tennis for 11 years now.

And what exactly does that have to do with Federer's strategy in the 2009 Australian Open final?

 

[Andy22]

nadal also a much cleaner player than Federer making less errors every match and that's a fact