WTF 2013 : London Sidewalk Cafe Discussions

[NADAL2005RG]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

Uh, Nadal did nto play a very good match against Rosol at Wimbledon, unless the standards for this all time great are that low. He wasn't terrible, and it took an insane performance by Rosol to knock him out, but he certainly was not playing "very good."

And just because Nadal played in pain before doesn't mean he wasn't forced to sit on the sidelines this year. Technically, I can step on a tennis court with a broken foot. Not playing might be a decision on my part, but it's a decision that I'm, in many ways, FORCED to take. If Nadal had it his way, he would have played in every tournament he missed. But he was FORCED not to play them by virtue of not being 100%.

Most importantly, Nadal certainly did not plan on a seven months absence from the get-go. This is simply false information.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I saw the 2 five-setters Nadal played at 2010 Wimbledon. I can tell you now, compared to those matches, Nadal played a tidy match vs Rosol. 41 winners, 16 unforced errors, and his 4th set was outstanding. If they didn't halt the match at the end of set 4, that momentum would likely have carried Nadal to victory. Nadal made a full commitment after Wimbledon last year to only return when his tendons were deemed 100% healthy. That was the plan.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal cruised through each service game after that. Just one bad game lost Nadal the 5th set. The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

:laydownlaughing :snigger :laydownlaughing..rosol d. nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4. :ras:

 

[Moxie]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

truth of what you witnessed would be nadal lost to rosol.

if you want me to lie to suit your distorted reality I cannot do that, If you want to be deceitful and untrustworthy then that is your choice and I wont sink to your level.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

truth of what you witnessed would be nadal lost to rosol.

if you want me to lie to suit your distorted reality I cannot do that, If you want to be deceitful and untrustworthy then that is your choice and I wont sink to your level.

Of course Nadal lost to Rosol.
I never said Nadal won.
I was talking about the quality of Nadal's performance. Oh I forget, I'm not allowed an opinion here without being personally attacked.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

truth of what you witnessed would be nadal lost to rosol.

if you want me to lie to suit your distorted reality I cannot do that, If you want to be deceitful and untrustworthy then that is your choice and I wont sink to your level.

Of course Nadal lost to Rosol.
I never said Nadal won.
I was talking about the quality of Nadal's performance. Oh I forget, I'm not allowed an opinion here without being personally attacked.

no one "personally attacted" you..of course you are allowed an opinion, even if it does make you look spectacularly stupid,:laydownlaughing

i was merely expressing an opinion and a fact..no need for all this paranoia of yours..take a chill pill baby..

nadals quality of performance was way below what was required to beat the world no 100 rosol..deal with that reality, no need for you to cry old bean.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

ND05RG: I don't see why you feel the need to reach so hard to make Nadal's wins look (even) better and his losses seem accidental/inconsequential. He's the best player this year, he's got 13 Slams. When he wins, it's very much to do with his skill, but as with all tennis matches, there's something to do with the player on the other side of the net. He loses sometimes. It's going to happen. Really, trying to rewrite the Rosol match?..you're too much.

Does the word 'magnanimous' exist in your language? Try to be a better winner. The way you're defending him, you'd think Nadal lost on Monday.

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

truth of what you witnessed would be nadal lost to rosol.

if you want me to lie to suit your distorted reality I cannot do that, If you want to be deceitful and untrustworthy then that is your choice and I wont sink to your level.

Of course Nadal lost to Rosol.
I never said Nadal won.
I was talking about the quality of Nadal's performance. Oh I forget, I'm not allowed an opinion here without being personally attacked.

no one "personally attacted" you..of course you are allowed an opinion, even if it does make you look spectacularly stupid,:laydownlaughing

i was merely expressing an opinion and a fact..no need for all this paranoia of yours..take a chill pill baby..

nadals quality of performance was way below what was required to beat the world no 100 rosol..deal with that reality, no need for you to cry old bean.

So you are saying you didn't actually see the Rosol match, is that right? Because nobody would call Rosol's performance that of a world number 100. Rosol's performance has been raved about repeatedly all over the internet. I've heard fans speak in amazement at how Rosol could play that one match so perfectly yet suck for virtually every other match of his career. I rate Rosol's performance greater than Petz2010 and Haase2010.

BTW, you just said "of course you are allowed an opinion, even if it does make you look spectacularly stupid". That's another personal attack. You keep defeating yourself....

 

[Front242]

I'm only stating the obvious - Nadal is a tennis expert. Are you a tennis expert? Nadal planned and executed the last 12 months perfectly.

Nadal was forced to take 7 months off. He didn't "plan" on doing so. If he did, he wouldn't have announced that he was going to be back at the Australian Open only to pull out two weeks before the tournament began due to some virus and his knees not being ready.

No, Nadal wasn't "forced". It was a decision. He could have decided to play in pain (as he did in previous years). Uncle Toni said they would have played after Wimbledon 2012 if they used "bandaid solutions" (painkillers, numbing injections etc.) that they used in the past. The vow in 2012 was to stop using bandaid solutions and also to only play when 100%.

See, if it was 2010 (when Nadal apparently had some bad tendinitis issues after winning Roland Garros, but played and won Wimbledon - after playing a couple of 5-setters in Week One very similar to the 2012 Rosol match) or other earlier years, Nadal would have played the Olympics and US Open. He himself said, withdrawing from the Olympics was the hardest thing he's ever done in his life. That would be because he usually would have played in that situation (being 60-70% healthy etc.).

Let's not forget, Nadal played a very good match vs Rosol at Wimbledon (41 winners, 16 unforced errors) and stormed through the 4th set, and actually played well in the 5th set after being broken early. Nadal was able to play the 2012 Olympics, but chose not to because of the vow to only play when 100% healthy. The plan worked. It took intelligence and discipline.

lol wut :snigger well rosol "stormed through" the 5th set ,:laydownlaughing

also rosol "stormed through" 2 other sets..where nadal only '"stormed through" one additional set..apart from the the set you claimed he "stormed through" initially. :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing

You should re-read my post. I only said Nadal stormed through the 4th set, which he definitely did.

Rosol broke serve to begin the 5th set. Nadal held serve the rest of the way. Just one bad game after the roof delay lost Nadal the 5th set (BTW, I say "roof delay" because there was no rain, just the closing of the roof in anticipation of bad light which the match referee was told would arrive within the next 30 minutes. He decided the 5th set would probably last more than 30 minutes so he wanted the roof closed for that reason, quite bizarrely. He would later apologize for the mishandling). The sets Rosol won were each 6-4. I wouldn't call that "storming". Whereas Nadal won the 4th set 6-2 and with attacking tennis. The observations by commentators at the time were that Nadal had loosened up and was rolling.

2010 Wimbledon
Nadal d Petzschner 6-4, 4-6, 6-7(5), 6-2, 6-3
Nadal d Haase 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3
2012 Wimbledon
Rosol d Nadal 6-7(9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
Take away the 30 minute closing of the roof and Nadal wins that 5th set easily, according to momentum.

Yeah and take away the MTO while behind against Haase in 2010 and the multiple uncalled for dirty cheating MTOs in the match against Petzschner while behind 2 sets to 1, with Petz serving bombs and hitting monster groundstrokes and Petzschner has a good shot at winning so what's your point? Just seeing as you're ranting about momentum I said I'd throw that in 'cos your hero's aim was clearly to break his opponents momentum in both those matches while trailing 2 sets to 1.

 

[Kieran]

"dirty cheating MTOs?"

Prove it!

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Let's face it, the Rosol match was exaggerated. It was hardly any different to the Haase and Petz matches. I saw all 3 matches. I'm just pointing out reality. You can believe what you want about the Rosol match and how Nadal played. I see that it was hardly any different to the 5-setters Nadal played when he won Wimbledon in 2010, except there was no 30 minute break at the end of the 4th set in those matches. Its no big deal, I'm just telling the truth of what I witnessed. I'm not going to lie to suit your perception (or whatever you call it).

truth of what you witnessed would be nadal lost to rosol.

if you want me to lie to suit your distorted reality I cannot do that, If you want to be deceitful and untrustworthy then that is your choice and I wont sink to your level.

Of course Nadal lost to Rosol.
I never said Nadal won.
I was talking about the quality of Nadal's performance. Oh I forget, I'm not allowed an opinion here without being personally attacked.

no one "personally attacted" you..of course you are allowed an opinion, even if it does make you look spectacularly stupid,:laydownlaughing

i was merely expressing an opinion and a fact..no need for all this paranoia of yours..take a chill pill baby..

nadals quality of performance was way below what was required to beat the world no 100 rosol..deal with that reality, no need for you to cry old bean.

So you are saying you didn't actually see the Rosol match, is that right? Because nobody would call Rosol's performance that of a world number 100. Rosol's performance has been raved about repeatedly all over the internet. I've heard fans speak in amazement at how Rosol could play that one match so perfectly yet suck for virtually every other match of his career. I rate Rosol's performance greater than Petz2010 and Haase2010.

BTW, you just said "of course you are allowed an opinion, even if it does make you look spectacularly stupid". That's another personal attack. You keep defeating yourself....

not a personal attack just my opinion..im entitled to form my opinion given the low quality of the posts you give us to laugh at..err I mean read.

did I say I didn't watch the rosol match..no I did not, yet more false mirrors and smokescreen nonsense from you as usual..i watch the rosol match..all of it.

also nobody said rosol played like a world no 100..i said rosol was the world no 100 rank..i know you have a problem in dealing with reality and also a problem with locating the truth.,but please at least learn to read and get with the programme daddio. :laydownlaughing

 

[Riotbeard]

If they allowed tennis to be played on water (where of course nadal can walk), it would extend his career by a millennium, because natural surfaces like water are much better on the knees. Sadly mortals like Nole, Fed, and Murray can merely swim.

 

[Front242]

"dirty cheating MTOs?"

Prove it!

Prove they weren't! Good luck with that. Petzschner said it was very clever of him as he lost focus pretty quickly afterwards and also said he firmly believed Nadal could run around for another 3 sets if needed. At least he hasn't used MTO's in quite some time now but he was pretty bad at exploiting them back then.

 

[DarthFed]

Rosol did nothing special as backed up by Darcis this year. Rafa is garbage at Wimbledon the 1st week it is simple as that. The topspin isn't bouncing at shoulder height and it's hard to retrieve balls all match. Luckily, you naturally play nobodies until at least the 4th round but it hasn't even mattered the last 2 years.