Wimbledon Preview Talk

[GameSetAndMath]

A potential Nadal vs Dustin Brown in the second round. Ugh.

If Rafa can't beat Dustin Brown on grass in a best 3 of 5 then he isn't ready to compete for any slam title

That's because he isn't.
[/quote ] when he makes it to the 2nd week , the court's surface will be drying and the balls will be bouncing higher, I think his confidence will grow which gives him a chance to challenge for the title

(Un)fortunately, Rafa is not playing Brown in second week. He is playing Brown in 2nd round, assuming of course that both of them get there. Not only that Brown has a good game on grass and has beaten Rafa before on grass, being a qualifier, Brown has won three matches in a row this week and is on full flight to take on the Bull.

However, if Brown does not manage to tame the Bull, the Bull has a clear path to QF where Andy will finish him off.

This is because in 3rd round Rafa is slated to play Troicki whom he recently beat in Stuttgart and in 4th round Rafa is slated to play Ferrer, who is his personal whipping boy.

So, Brown has an important job to do here following on the footsteps of Rosol, Darcis and Kyrgios.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

A potential Nadal vs Dustin Brown in the second round. Ugh.

If Rafa can't beat Dustin Brown on grass in a best 3 of 5 then he isn't ready to compete for any slam title

That's because he isn't.
[/quote ] when he makes it to the 2nd week , the court's surface will be drying and the balls will be bouncing higher, I think his confidence will grow which gives him a chance to challenge for the title

(Un)fortunately, Rafa is not playing Brown in second week. He is playing Brown in 2nd round, assuming of course that both of them get there. Not only that Brown has a good game on grass and has beaten Rafa before on grass, being a qualifier, Brown has won three matches in a row this week and is on full flight to take on the Bull.

However, if Brown does not manage to tame the Bull, the Bull has a clear path to QF where Andy will finish him off.

This is because in 3rd round Rafa is slated to play Troicki whom he recently beat in Stuttgart and in 4th round Rafa is slated to play Ferrer, who is his personal whipping boy.

So, Brown has an important job to do here following on the footsteps of Rosol, Darcis and Kyrgios.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nevwr said it was a huge upset but Roger won 65 straight coming in. I'd say only really pessimistic fans figured he'd lose that match and they did it based off his awful 2008 leading into it.

Yes, which is why you can't ignore the fact that he didn't look good in 2008. This makes no sense, you're making it out to be a bigger surprise than it was due to Federer's resume at Wimbledon, rather than the context at the time. NOBODY was surprised in the least that Nadal won. Nobody.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Federer losing at Wimbledon back then was almost the same level of upset as Nadal losing at Roland Garros for the first time.

Edit: and yes, watch the Nadal fans compare Soderling to Nadal. That's not what was meant here. It's as Darth said and how I also meant it. Both had not lost there before. Hence the end of the big winning streak. Therefore, yes, an upset. But of course a lesser one than Nadal losing to Soderling. Djokovic was heavy favourite this year at RG after beating Nadal and yet he lost. Same thing. An upset.

Not even close to an upset, and not even close to Nadal losing at RG to anyone. The big difference between the two is when Nadal was dominating RG at the time, his main rival was perceived to have very little chance against him, whereas most figured Rafa was coming closer to beating Roger at Wimbledon, and sure enough he did.

Federer was a slight favorite but it was as close to being even as I remember any major final in the past decade or so. You guys are trying to re-write history.

 

[Kieran]

It's hilarious reading all this logic-gymnastics, because of course in 2008 Rafa's time had come, he slaughtered Federer in Paris and it wasn't even a small surprise that he beat him in Wimbledon too. Not even a slight tremor. And had he not gotten tight in the third, and closed it out there and then, there would have been no surprise either...

 

[DarthFed]

Nah the revisionist history is thinking someone who was riding a 65 match win streak on a surface was the underdog or anything but a clear favorite. Roger had played garbage tennis most of that year but showed decent form that grass season. His play in the first 2 sets was an abomination. After that he raised his game to a C or B and made it less humiliating, still at best he was erratic throughout and folded in the end. Breaking the mediocre Rafa serve once in 5 sets says it all.

 

[nehmeth]

Dammit.... the "ultimate" Fedal thread keeps finding its way into all the others. :snicker

 

[Fiero425]

Dammit.... the "ultimate" Fedal thread keeps finding its way into all the others. :snicker

The obsession is mind numbing; esp. since there's no rivalry! Nadal owns Federer lock, stock, & barrel! Nole's coming on strong and will pass both, H2H and in the Masters record! Taking 4 of the 5 eliminated Roger's hold on #2! :angel::dodgy:

 

[Front242]

Frankly who cares about Masters

 

[Fiero425]

Frankly who cares about Masters

That's what you say when that's all you can really achieve after starting so late with 2 other great champions sharing the spoils for so many years! Nole can't do much with the FO but hope to take 1 or 2 before it's too late! He'll never overtake Nadal and Federer in the majors count and Roger holds most records dealing with consecutive events, finals, semi's, & QF's! You take and brag with what's available! lol! :snicker :laydownlaughing :angel: :dodgy: - Nole's calendar year GS was shattered by Stan; the other possibility gone for now! :cover

 

[Kieran]

"Nole's calendar year GS was shattered by Stan..." :laydownlaughing :lolz:

 

[the AntiPusher]

Federer losing at Wimbledon back then was almost the same level of upset as Nadal losing at Roland Garros for the first time.

Edit: and yes, watch the Nadal fans compare Soderling to Nadal. That's not what was meant here. It's as Darth said and how I also meant it. Both had not lost there before. Hence the end of the big winning streak. Therefore, yes, an upset. But of course a lesser one than Nadal losing to Soderling. Djokovic was heavy favourite this year at RG after beating Nadal and yet he lost. Same thing. An upset.

Front, that makes no sense comparing Rafa to Soderling, I am gonna leave it that cause I am in a good mood today my friend :clap

 

[Front242]

Well you clearly didn't read that the comparison was both had big winning streaks ended as favourites on the respective surfaces and I'll leave it at that too 'cos that was the main point.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nah the revisionist history is thinking someone who was riding a 65 match win streak on a surface was the underdog or anything but a clear favorite. Roger had played garbage tennis most of that year but showed decent form that grass season. His play in the first 2 sets was an abomination. After that he raised his game to a C or B and made it less humiliating, still at best he was erratic throughout and folded in the end. Breaking the mediocre Rafa serve once in 5 sets says it all.

Nadal had won a 9 out of 10 FO's and had won it 5 times in a row before losing to Novak this year. He was a combined 70-1 (or something like that) at the FO. By Darth logic: UPSET~!

 

[DarthFed]

Great comparison, given that Rafa's win streak on the surface stood at 4 heading into that match.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Great comparison, given that Rafa's win streak on the surface stood at 4 heading into that match.

No you're right. 2008 Federer was the same Federer won won 64 matches on grass, as evidenced by losses to baby Murray, Fish, Roddick, Montanes, Stepanek, and others... TMF indeed.

Context.

This is so dumb. Nobody was surprised then. Nobody is surprised in hindsight, and the same poster (you) who for years, said "I'd be surprised if Federer beats Nadal at any slam at this point" is now changing his tune because he can't get over a match that happened ages ago. This is legitimately terrible logic.

PS: My comparison is far better than the idiotic comparison that equated that loss to Nadal losing at RG the first time. Fed fans are on fire.

 

[Front242]

^ Sure it is. Both were the most dominant players in history on grass and clay respectively and then they both lost. Yeah, idiotic alright. Keep smoking the good stuff.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

(Un)fortunately, Rafa is not playing Brown in second week. He is playing Brown in 2nd round, assuming of course that both of them get there. Not only that Brown has a good game on grass and has beaten Rafa before on grass, being a qualifier, Brown has won three matches in a row this week and is on full flight to take on the Bull.

However, if Brown does not manage to tame the Bull, the Bull has a clear path to QF where Andy will finish him off.

This is because in 3rd round Rafa is slated to play Troicki whom he recently beat in Stuttgart and in 4th round Rafa is slated to play Ferrer, who is his personal whipping boy.

So, Brown has an important job to do here following on the footsteps of Rosol, Darcis and Kyrgios.

 

[DarthFed]

Great comparison, given that Rafa's win streak on the surface stood at 4 heading into that match.

No you're right. 2008 Federer was the same Federer won won 64 matches on grass, as evidenced by losses to baby Murray, Fish, Roddick, Montanes, Stepanek, and others... TMF indeed.

Context.

This is so dumb. Nobody was surprised then. Nobody is surprised in hindsight, and the same poster (you) who for years, said "I'd be surprised if Federer beats Nadal at any slam at this point" is now changing his tune because he can't get over a match that happened ages ago. This is legitimately terrible logic.

PS: My comparison is far better than the idiotic comparison that equated that loss to Nadal losing at RG the first time. Fed fans are on fire.

Yes Roger wasn't the same Roger but he still looked like the 2nd best player for much of 2008 and he was on his best surface. Comparing that to Nadal who was probably like 20-5 on clay heading into the RG QF is stupid. Roger was 10-0 on grass in 2008 and hadn't dropped a set, most figured he'd get the job done and start to salvage what for him was already a very bad year.

 

[Haelfix]

Yes Roger wasn't the same Roger but he still looked like the 2nd best player for much of 2008 and he was on his best surface. Comparing that to Nadal who was probably like 20-5 on clay heading into the RG QF is stupid. Roger was 10-0 on grass in 2008 and hadn't dropped a set, most figured he'd get the job done and start to salvage what for him was already a very bad year.

No they didn't, I and many other people had Nadal as a favorite that year, it was very clear that Roger was not playing his best grass court tennis and the year before when he was clearly playing better he barely beat a 1 year younger Rafa in an epic 5 setter. It was clear the pendulum was swinging in what was already a very near 50-50 coin toss. I mean it wouldn't have surprised me if RF won, he was the greatest grass court player of a generation but no one stays on top forever and it was clear that he had been steadily losing his aura of invincibility relative to the rest of the tour. Meanwhile Rafa was playing his absolute best grass and clay court tennis of his career, and it was known he had a gamestyle that irritated Roger. I actually believed at the time that Rafa would take him in 3 or 4 tight sets.

And then there was the surface itself, which was becoming more and more clay like as the weeks went on, where balls all of a sudden bounced high and where the back of the court looked like it was a playground. I mean almost every significant factor of determining the outcome was aligning with Nadal. It really wasn't a stretch to believe he'd win, and I think it was mainly a testament to Federer's great mental that he actually made the match a battle. At least, thats how I interpreted the match.