Who had the worse 5th set collapse in terms of converting straightforward breakpoint opportunities?

[Moxie]

Maybe every time Nadal picks his butt Cali feels a huge sexual attraction but he is not comfortable with his sexuality so he lashes out on him instead.

If you think that moves the conversation forward, I have nothing to say to you. I really don't get the trolling with grossness, and sexual orientation slags. It's way over-used, and doesn't move the conversation. I actually would like to hear from Cali on why he hates Nadal so much.

 

[brokenshoelace]

One thing I NEVER understood about Cali's hatred of Nadal. Nalbandian was Cali first and only love, we all know this to be written in stone but David's style of play wasnt conventional like Roger's or Novak's game. David was a better pure ball striker than Rafa but isn't the style of play similar..Isn't Rafa everything that Cali hoped that Nalbandian could ever be..

Wtf are you talking about?

 

[Moxie]

Wtf are you talking about?

I've already addressed this. Try to follow on.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Both Thiem and Nadal were the better players in those matches and were leading for the most part. They both deserved to win. This thread is really pointless but then again most of Cali's posts are.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I've already addressed this. Try to follow on.

Oh you've "addressed" this... Yeah, I'm not sure how that makes his point less incoherent/completely false.

 

[Moxie]

Oh you've "addressed" this... Yeah, I'm not sure how that makes his point less incoherent/completely false.

I just thought it would be more interesting if you continued the discussion rather than just snark...but you do you. All good.

 

[calitennis127]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahhahahaha

Oh boyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...

I really needed this. Man, that meltdown was really worth it. Almost as sweet as #19.

Lol.....why? Because I said the truth about your bullshit act?

You used to be the most boring, cheesy, cliche-spouting poster and now you curse at everyone and get all emotional to prove you're not boring.

So hahahhahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahaha

My name is Broken and I am going to try to prove that I have some charisma by swearing at you and writing out haha 400 times.

So do you believe me when I say I am interesting? Please think I'm interesting. Please. Don't call me boring anymore. I'm not! Okay? I'm Broken and I'm really a lot of fun.

 

[calitennis127]

Except, the whole point is, you fucking moron, that the match should have never gone to five sets to begin with, yet you fail to bring that up.

Except, you fucking retard, it had every reason to get to that point. You keep talking like Nadal was terrible in the third set and that's not the case at all. Medvedev raised his level in sets 3 and 4, while Nadal stayed constant and actually improved on serve (Nadal only served around 37% in the first set and Medvedev was so bad after getting the early break that he still lost). Sets 3 and 4 were not lost in a matter of minutes; they were not lost because Nadal got tired or made a bunch of errors. They were lost by the scores of 7-5 and 6-4 after a bunch of long games and long rallies. They were nothing like Federer's 5th set against Dimitrov in which Federer was spraying errors and the set was over in the snap of your little 3 centimer-long fingers.

You simply do not know what you are talking about - just like when you said Nadal was better than Djokovic on grass in 2010. But go ahead - curse at someone and show how hardcore you are! Do it! Try to prove you're interesting and original and have some spunk! Come on man! We believe in you!

 

[calitennis127]

If you take away those FOUR majors, his resume on hards is weak."

These people are allowed to vote, and thus....America.

Lol.....as though you know anything about the USA or the world at large, B-Shitboi. Every political post you make is as dumb and ignorant, like your post on the Covington incident, which shows that your "scholar" self could not even take the time to watch a video.

You can diss the USA all you want (and I do all the time for many reasons, such as the fact that it produces utter turds who think like yourself), but the fact remains that it is much more successful economically and otherwise than the part of the world from which you come and tens of millions of people from all over the world have been trying to come to it legally and illegally for decades. So those USA-craving immigrants and would-be immigrants must be really, really stupid too. But you wouldn't say that......because you're a pussy at your core, and you're scared of getting called a racist.

People like Broken are allowed to pose as intellectuals, and thus.....American universities that wannabe intellectuals like him flock to in order to prove their worth to the world.

As for his stupid tennis point, he can dodge this all he wants, but Nadal's hardcourt resume outside of the US Open is not at all indicative of someone who would win 4 hardcourt majors. He has gotten smacked far too many times and had far too limited success at the successful hardcourt events outside of New York to not characterize his performance there as an outlier.

Now has Nadal found a comfort zone playing in New York? Yes, clearly he has. But that doesn't change the overall picture, even if B-Shitboi doesn't want to look at it.

 

[calitennis127]

The guy has won 5 majors on hards in addition to 10 Masters 1000 events. He's also reached countless finals. I mean, come on, that's a bulletproof resume. This puts him up there with some of the best hard court players in history, so what on earth are we even discussing here?

Something that is above your head because you don't understand Nadal's psychology or the reason for his success (or sports psychology overall). Nadal is not like other players at all in that you can just stack up his overall record at events and compare them to everyone else as an indication of tennis skill or competence because, in terms of stamina, he is a freak of nature, which allows him to play at or above 90% of his capability every time he steps on the court on all surfaces. He is the most consistent and constant athlete I have ever seen - almost robot level.

You are too clueless to recognize this or understand this. And that's okay. But you really should just STFU and stop acting like you understand it. Just say you like Nadal and you're a fan and then move on. Stop pretending to understand how he operates when you clearly don't.

The fact that Nadal has won so little on hardcourts when you factor in his athletic and endurance advantages is an indication of how seriously limited his game is. Nadal is the only tennis player in history for whom you can say fatigue has been a factor less than 1-2% of the time in his matches. When he is in a tournament, no one ever expresses concern about him being tired after a long match. The only time I remember this happening was when he lost to Federer twice on clay (Hamburg 2007 and Madrid 2009) after 4-hour matches with Djokovic the day before (and long stretches of playing clay matches day after day in the weeks leading up). And I think he got crushed by Moya in Chennai one time because of a brutal semifinal the day before. But these examples are so few and far between that they don't even come close to being significant in his career.

In fact, the only time he won the Australian Open (2009), he had the second semifinal (played on Friday) while Federer had the first semifinal (played on Thursday). Despite having the second semifinal and going through a 5-hour match with Verdasco to boot, Nadal still managed to be fresh on Sunday and win a 5-set match.

That is how out-of-this-world and unusual his stamina is. So for him to have that kind of stamina, combined with elite quickness and movement, but only have 1 Australian and a few Indian Wells and Canada wins really is telling. It shows how much he lacks game on hardcourts.

 

[calitennis127]

One thing I NEVER understood about Cali's hatred of Nadal. Nalbandian was Cali first and only love, we all know this to be written in stone but David's style of play wasnt conventional like Roger's or Novak's game. David was a better pure ball striker than Rafa but isn't the style of play similar..Isn't Rafa everything that Cali hoped that Nalbandian could ever be..

What bothers me about Nadal's game is that fundamentally, with how he hits the ball and constructs points, he give opponents the opportunity to beat him if they're sharp and on top of things. Everyone has a solid chance to beat Nadal if they have a great day. His style of play allows them to set up shots and find a rhythm if they're sharp. Federer and Djokovic, on the other hand, play in a manner that does not allow the opponents a chance when they're on top of their game. If you need statistical proof of this, just look at how Nadal has won his biggest matches on hardcourts - by creating a huge number of (un)forced errors. This means his opponents are getting racquets on the shots he hits but not doing as much as they could with them. This approach of "I am going to make you come up with the goods" instead of "I am going to deliver the unstoppable" is simply not the ideal way to play a sport. It is a prudent approach in certain situations but as an overall strategy it simply reveals limitations.

On that point, I cannot stand the weasely way in which he has won so many big matches in Grand Slams, winning because of his opponent's failings more than his own strengths. Federer's meltdown in Australia 2009, Federer's self-destruction at Roland Garros in 2007 and 2011, Djokovic's implosion in the 3rd set of the US Open 2013, Medvedev's ridiculous 5th set, Djokovic shrinking at the end of the second set in the 2014 French Open final, etc.

These were all matches that Nadal won in which his opponent's failings were the biggest story in the match, not his own strengths, and that is because his game is limited in all but one way - endless stamina that allows him to play to 90% of his capability in every game of every set.

Nadal has more endurance than everyone on tour and is in the same league of athleticism as Djokovic and Federer. Yet he has struggled mightily on hardcourts and gotten absolutely doused numerous times, despite always playing to at least 90% of his capability. I find that sad, considering how much more athletic and fit he is than his competition.

 

[calitennis127]

Well yes but he said take out his US Open titles, which are 4.

And should be 1, if Djokovic and Medvedev did not have their heads up their asses. And frankly 0, if Federer had not fallen apart against Delpo in 2017.

Nadal was truly the beneficiary of some underachieving at the US Open by his competitors. Probably the biggest overachiever in tennis history in terms of success at a Grand Slam.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Something that is above your head because you don't understand Nadal's psychology or the reason for his success (or sports psychology overall). Nadal is not like other players at all in that you can just stack up his overall record at events and compare them to everyone else as an indication of tennis skill or competence because, in terms of stamina, he is a freak of nature, which allows him to play at or above 90% of his capability every time he steps on the court on all surfaces. He is the most consistent and constant athlete I have ever seen - almost robot level.

You are too clueless to recognize this or understand this. And that's okay. But you really should just STFU and stop acting like you understand it. Just say you like Nadal and you're a fan and then move on. Stop pretending to understand how he operates when you clearly don't.

The fact that Nadal has won so little on hardcourts when you factor in his athletic and endurance advantages is an indication of how seriously limited his game is. Nadal is the only tennis player in history for whom you can say fatigue has been a factor less than 1-2% of the time in his matches. When he is in a tournament, no one ever expresses concern about him being tired after a long match. The only time I remember this happening was when he lost to Federer twice on clay (Hamburg 2007 and Madrid 2009) after 4-hour matches with Djokovic the day before (and long stretches of playing clay matches day after day in the weeks leading up). And I think he got crushed by Moya in Chennai one time because of a brutal semifinal the day before. But these examples are so few and far between that they don't even come close to being significant in his career.

In fact, the only time he won the Australian Open (2009), he had the second semifinal (played on Friday) while Federer had the first semifinal (played on Thursday). Despite having the second semifinal and going through a 5-hour match with Verdasco to boot, Nadal still managed to be fresh on Sunday and win a 5-set match.

That is how out-of-this-world and unusual his stamina is. So for him to have that kind of stamina, combined with elite quickness and movement, but only have 1 Australian and a few Indian Wells and Canada wins really is telling. It shows how much he lacks game on hardcourts.

Yes because of Nadal's stamina if he actually was truly a great tennis player he should have had 50 RG, 20 AO, 30 USO and 20 WB. :cuckoo: Chang's and Murray's stamina got them so many hardcourt slams too... :cuckoo:

 

[Nadalfan2013]

And should be 1, if Djokovic and Medvedev did not have their heads up their asses. And frankly 0, if Federer had not fallen apart against Delpo in 2017.

Nadal was truly the beneficiary of some underachieving at the US Open by his competitors. Probably the biggest overachiever in tennis history in terms of success at a Grand Slam.

Stop being a troll. The more you insult and disrespect Rafa the more he wins. I've been telling it to Federer fans for years, it's called karma.

 

[calitennis127]

Stop being a troll. The more you insult and disrespect Rafa the more he wins. I've been telling it to Federer fans for years, it's called karma.

Then why has he only won Cincinnati once? Why has he never won Shanghai? Why has he never won Miami? Why has he never won Bercy? Why has he never won World Tour Finals? Why has he only won the Australian Open once?

 

[calitennis127]

Yes because of Nadal's stamina if he actually was truly a great tennis player he should have had 50 RG, 20 AO, 30 USO and 20 WB. :cuckoo: Chang's and Murray's stamina got them so many hardcourt slams too... :cuckoo:

The fact that Nadal has been as athletically superior as he has been and never won Miami, Shanghai, Bercy, or World Tour Finals (and only won Cincy and the Australian Open once) tells you how limited his game is. In Canada he has won mainly because of weak draws (like Federer and Djokovic not playing) and swirling winds.

So the only two tournaments I look at as impressive for him on hardcourts are Indian Wells (where he has endured his share of beatings) and the US Open, where I would argue he has overachieved more than anyone in the history of the sport at a particular event (and that has a lot to do with the underachieving of Djokovic and Federer).

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Then why has he only won Cincinnati once? Why has he never won Shanghai? Why has he never won Miami? Why has he never won Bercy? Why has he never won World Tour Finals? Why has he only won the Australian Open once?

LOL. He made 5 finals at the AO. He made 5 finals at Miami. And he barely plays the indoor season after the USO yet he made 2 finals at Shanghai, 2 finals at WTF, a final at Bercy. Go get some help. :cuckoo:

 

[calitennis127]

LOL. He made 5 finals at the AO. He made 5 finals at Miami. And he barely plays the indoor season after the USO yet he made 2 finals at Shanghai, 2 finals at WTF, a final at Bercy. Go get some help. :cuckoo:

And why did he lose all those matches? What in your opinion caused him to lose?

 

[Nadalfan2013]

And why did he lose all those matches? What in your opinion caused him to lose?

his lack of stamina

 

[calitennis127]

I don't agree that Nalbandian is that unconventional, or that he shares much in common with Nadal, other than a weak serve, relative to their game, and a 2-hander. I actually think of Cali as the only person who can claim, without bias, to purely hate Nadal's style of play.

There are aspects of it that I like and others that I cannot stand. But what I really cannot stand is that he has won so many big matches with that style of play, by weaseling his way to victory as his opponents did not play anywhere to their capability (see Djokovic falling apart in set 3 of the 2013 US Open or Medvedev's choke/collapse in set 5 of the 2019 USO).