Think many people are forgetting that the day before, Nadal fought a war against Djokovic for 4 hours. Don't get me wrong, I love Fed, but he was a bit lucky that Nadal was out of gas this day.
The point from 0:34 to 0:55 is probably one of the most tactical play ever. If you look at it analytically, you clearly see how Nadal tries to avoid hitting into Fed's forehand, and is continuously hitting into the backhand side. Fed is aware of it and decides to play the same game, continuously hitting into Nadal's backhand as well until it unfooted him. 90% of the point was played on the backhand side. It's nice to see that they're not only forehand-hitters, but also great strategist.
I like how Nadal didn't even bother to look at Roger when they met at the net after Roger won. He looked positively disappointed, which is understandable since it's his home surface; his home town.
when u have won 3 australian opens and the other guy wins his first, and u take HIS moment away from him by crying and making everyone feel bad for you, YOU ARE a poor sportsman
LOL whatever dude. You can't say that Federer cried on purpose to ruin Nadal's moment. There is no reason that one would think that except that they are just grasping for reasons to badmouth him.
You're calling Federer fans rude and such when you're posting comments like this? You sir, are a hypocrite and I suggest you read your own comments before you insult others for theirs. You are completely fabricating a reason for Federer's tears to make him sound bad. Get the fuck over yourself, loser.
@dwilliams02 i really dont know what to make of your post. On one hand you start insulting me in the first post, and on the other hand u sound like a decent guy in the second post. Maybe i did go overboard with my comments but i was pissed off after reading some of the other rude comments.
Yeah you're totally right. My bad. I too was guilty of being pissed immediately after reading your post. I just think it's ridiculous to say the guy purposely cried to ruin Nadal's moment. It's one thing to make fun of him for crying, but it's another to assign false motive. But yeah, my bad for dissing you and cursing at you, that was 100% uncalled for. In any case, here's to a possible Nadal-Fed final in Miami.
And for the record, I am indeed a Federer fan, but I do not hate or even dislike Nadal because I respect how great a player is when he's healthy. I can't tell you how hopeful I am that he can get back to the top of his game so we can see some more epic matches between the two. But you're right, Federer fans do fear Nadal because he certainly has our guy's number. But all of that aside, just because you see Fed fans badmouth your guy, you don't have to respond in kind. Be the bigger man PLEASE.
It's not about Australian Opens, you fucking retard. It's about Federer finally getting confident about returning to Number 1, and making his invincible form once again. Not to mention he had lost to Nadal so many times already. Do you honestly think Federer did it on purpose? You, sir, are trying to discredit Federer falsely? Federer just felt at the lowest point of having lost another final. Guess what? Nadal cried in Wimbledon 2007. So what the hell are you saying?
@Sonic2710 I was annoyed with Federer at the time, but I do get the frustration and disappointment of the moment and it no longer bothers me. The main difference between Nadal Wimbledon 2007 and Federer AO 2008 is that the only reason we know about Rafa is that he told us, he cried in private and did not detract from Federer's winning moment, that's the big difference.
if nadal isnt al least at in the 90% tile of his capabilities fed will play his max to death and put you on a slab for your corpse to rot when hes in the shadows hitting backhands its so perfect
what classy player takes shots at younger players like he has done with Djokovic and Murray? What classy player swears at the umpire? What classy player ruins someones elses presentation ceremeony or smashes his racket?
Rafa's only shot at another slam is this year's French...i know it sounds ridiculous but his game is so demanding (physically and mentally) that he would have to be alien to repeat the kind of success he had in '08. Rafa's run that year reminds me a little bit of Muster's in '96 (Rafa is a more complete player of course). 50/50 he wins another slam in my opinion.
federer had won 5 grand slams when he JUST turned 24...
rafa is about to turn 24 and he has currently achieved 6 grand slams...plus he has the chance to make it 7 at the french open before his 24th birthday...so they are very equal. but federer then went on to have MASSIVE seasons in 06 and 07..winning 6 out of 8 grand slams in both years together. if you think that rafa can replicate that sort of form..then thats ur opinion. but, for me, he is not good enough an all rounder to be able to...
i think rafa will win a few more slams..but he wont be in the greatest of all time debate..no way. nadal's tennis is simple..it all relies on his physical strength..running down anything and everything your opponent hits..and forcing him into mistakes. thats how rafa won 3 of his 4 french opens (the 4th he actually won through great execution of tactics and mixing up his approach)...
just like soderling beat rafa fair and square..there were no injuries. rafa beat soderling 6-0 6-1 in rome only 2 weeks prior to the french open...soderling just outplayed nadal in the fo..plain and simple.
federer's record in slams far outweights nadal's..federer has reached 18 of the last 19 grand slam finals..and reached the last 23 grand semi finals at least...the BEST rafa has ever achieved is 5 semi's in a row...which just isn't as good...
Rafa, Roger etc... we can of course prefer one of them but if the rival win, just have to say well done. ! Try to look after excuse when your favorite player loose is just stupid. Keep a good spirit as Roger AND Rafa !
When you win a final, you don't just win the final but all the tournament. It means that you handle your tournament very well round after round...from the first round to the finalWhen Fed won the french open, he had a big semi against Del Po (and in five sets) a very diffcult round against Haas...etc... He still won. Well done.And when Rafa won the Australian this 2009 year, he had a hughe semi against Verdasco. He still won the final. Well done !
Sorry for my bad english...To be a tennis champion is also being able to handle your carrer in the good and bad moments (personal's problems, physical's problems etc...) If you re not able to do that, it can't be an excuse....Winning a tournament is also to be able to win all your matches and keep some physical and mental energy round after round... Yes Nadal had a BIg semi against Djokovic...is it an excuse ? Surely not.
At RG 2009, Nadal came from beating Soderling 6-0, 6-1 in Rome and giving Hewitt, a former #1 a master class on clay court tennis. He declares he is "slightly below" his level of 2008 when he won RG without dropping a set. Suddenly, the Swede comes out firing from both wings and Nadal can't respond to the flat bombs Soderling is throwing at him. He loses, fair and square, and ... surprise "he was injured"... same story at the USO (vs Delpo) and AO (vs Murray). He is only fit when he wins?
@Bostero3771 when is hewitt a master on claycourts? Hewitt was well past his best anyway. Yes Nadal was injured, that is why he had to undergo traetment after the french. Federer is the crybaby who makes excuses like his mono or his "back injury" at the Ao.
You know what else is crap? All these lousy comments you've been posting. Bostero3771 never said Hewitt was a master at clay courts. He said Nadal gave Hewitt a master class on the clay courts. You really need to brush up on your reading skills. And how is it possible that in Wimby 08, it was because Federer was in bad shape that got him to the finals without dropping a set? That's impossible. He would've lost a lot of sets if he was in bad form. Stop saying crap you don't know about.
@natbrain I am not saying crap i dont know about, u are the one who needs to brush on on your reading skills. Bostero was trying to claim that federer was in bad form in Wimby 08, i was ASKING HIM HOW CAN FEDERER BE IN BAD FORM WHEN HE REACHES THE FINAL OF A GS WITHOUT LOSING A SET. Thats the point, he wasnt in bad form in WIMBY 08.
You're only talking about Wimbledon 2008. Look at the other tournaments he competed in! He lost to Karlovic, Stepanek, Gilles Simon, and even Guillermo Canas! He was more or less speaking of the general season of his career. He said "when he lost to Wimby to Nadal, he was probably in the worst mental shape of his career, losing to guys like..." He wasn't talking about JUST WIMBY! He was talking about his horrible 2008 season. Fed won ONE GS that year! It was because he got mono!
@natbrain u know it is amazing how he can play through "mono", and still reach gs finals, he must be superman. and u know even if he lost to other players on hardcourts, he was playing very well at wimbledon 08 because it was on a surface where he was the defending champion, where he didnt expect to lose. I dont believe he won one gs because of mono, i believe it was because the competition had gotten better then it was in 07 or 06.
@hhhhdmt, everyone has there ups and downs in their careers. That's something so amazing about Federer's game. Even though Federer may not be playing well, he can still take a match to a 5th set or a 3rd set, depending on the occasion. Competition had gotten better in 2007, and with his mono and that competition, it would be very difficult to win. Look at Fed's 2006 and 2007 RG scores against Rafa. 4 sets. But in 08, it was 6-1 6-3 6-0. Rafa got better, but Fed's health was also a factor
Watch the press conference after the Hewitt match. No mention whatsoever of any injury or even a small physical inconvenient. Surprisingly, he gets treatment every time he takes a solid beating... maybe it is psychological treatment?
@Bostero3771 Maybe its fed who needs to get psychological treatment, after all everytime he loses, its because of "mono", his back injury, or the light being bad. Federer also came up with his "mono" story AFTER losing to Djokovic in AO 08 when he had no answer for the serb.
Susrprising, you have not been able to quote ONE SINGLE time Fedex has either quit a match because of injury or used it as an excuse. Not even his loss to Djoko on the AO match. Never mentioned in the post-match interview or in subsequent days. The diagnosis with Mono came more than a month later after he continued feeling fatigue and being slow in all matches. No need to give the examples for Nadal quitting or coming up woth "injury" excuses again. Everyone knows them well.
@Bostero3771 his "mono" is a pile or rubbish. You cannot simply decide to play through mono. Ask Mario ancic. He did use the mono excuse. Nadal quit once against Murray to PREVENT FURTHER INJURY if u can understand that. Nadal played last years US OPEN with an abdominal strain and lost to delpo, but he DID NOT USE IT AS AN EXCUSE. Nadal rarely makes excuses unlike Federer who is the king of excuses, "oh the light was bad at wimby," "my mono" "I gave the match to him".
@Bostero3771 he blamed mono for the loss against Djokovic, bad light for the match against Nadal at wimby and so on. I already have said this, its a pity u cant read.
Mono diagnosed a few months after the AO. Watch interview with Johnnie Mac after WImby. Never quit a match. Nadal has done plenty of that. Keep participating.
Plenty of quitting while being beaten or blaming "injuries" that were not present the day before. Really, how many times do I need to mention them? Davydenko, Delpo, Soderling, Murray (3 times), even Monaco!!! and those are just the ones I recall from memory.
@Bostero3771 why do u keep mentioning delpotro? Have u seen the post match conference after that match when Nadal refused to blame any injury? Federer's "mono" was not present before he lost to djokovic, again i will ask how many times has Nadal actually retired from a match?
Yes it was. All the reports say that Federer was diagnosed with mono before the Australian Open and although he did not have it during the actual tournament, it surely must have affected his training going in.
I respect you hhh because you seem to know what you're talking about most of the time, but this and the comment saying that Federer cried on purpose to steal Nadal's moment? Dude, you make it hard to respect your comments when you make shit up like that. Just stick to the facts.
BTW, Nadal also quit against Davydenko and Monaco and blamed "injuries: for his losses to Soderling at RG, Murray at USO and Rotterdam in addition to the two you mention. Strangely enough, he was not "injured" in any of the previous matches... no matter how hard you try, the facts are there. ROger NEVER quit a match and NEVER blamed injuries. Nadal has made a career of it.
@Bostero3771 ROGER ALWAYS BLAMES HIS INJURIES and is far more of a sore loser then Nadal is. The post match press conferences that he has done shows that.
The excuse that Nadal was not at his best is ridiculous. He was coming from 33 matches won on Clay, winning the AO, Indian Wells, Montecarlo and Rome. He was in the best shape of his life. Federer, on the other hand, when he lost Wimby to Nadal was probably in the worst mental shape of his career losing to guys like Karlovic, Fish, Stepanek, Roddick (for the first time in 16 matches) and winning only two minor tournaments: Estoril and Halle. Difference? He did not claim "injuries".
No he did not. The inrterview with Jonnie Mac and the press conference are clear. He said "Rafa was just too solid and served very well today, I tried everything but it did not work". Then look at the press conference of Nadal after the Soderling match at RG and compare. Those are there for everyone to see.
@Bostero3771 why dont u watch the post match interview after australian open 09 final when fed said that he "gave" the match to Nadal? Real classy, eh?
Saying "he gave the match" is a tennis strategy or execution statement admitting oone's own failure to execute (just like Nadal does after losing to Soderling at RG). VERY different from claiming "injuries"... no need to quote the examples again.... Murray, Davydenko......etc, etc.
Oh, BTW, after his match last night, ROger was awarded the "Stephan Edberg Sportsmanship Award" for the 5th consecutive year. Who votes? all players on the ATP tour. THAT is real classy.
@Bostero3771 yeah fed is a great sportsman. Swearing at the umpire at the us open,ruining Nadals win at the australian open 09 by crying like a 5 year old, acting like a sore loser in the press conference after the match, repeatedly taking shots at younger players like Djokovic and Murray, smashing his racket in miami, yeah real classy. Federer's post match conference after the australian open 09 is far worse then any conference Nadal has ever given(yes even the FO 09).
HE IS a classy player. UNICEF Ambassador, voted by his peers for 5 consecutive years. Nadal??? Still waiting for ONE of those awards. I know it is hard for you to digest the facts but no matter whatt you write, they are still there: 16 GS, 237 consecutive wks as #1, most GS consecutive finals and semis, only player to win TWO GS 5 consecutive yrs. (plus a few more records) AND Spoortsman of the yr AND fan's favorite for the 3rd year. Nadal??? Still trying....
@Bostero3771 he IS NOT CLASSY, he is an arrogant sportsman, taking shots at murray and djokovic, ruining Nadal's ceremony. Can u name me once that Nadal ruined federer or someone else's presentation ceremony? NO.
Strangely enough both Djoko and Murray always say he is a a gentleman and example for other players to follow... crying after a match? plenty of examples of that in many sports. Nopt a provoked act and hardly aimed at "ruining: someone's ceremony. The worst way to ruin someone's victory is by quitting and claim injuries when the other player is giving you a solid whipping. Your little Rafa has plenty of that.
@Bostero3771 no he hasnt. YES FEDERER DID RUIN NADALS CEREMONY AND HE WAS A SORE LOSER IN THE POST MATCH CONFERENCE TOO. For the BILLIONTH TIME, Nadal retired against Murray to prevent further injury, got it? Oh no u cant since u are a fedtard.
You can repeat it a TRILLIONTH time and call me all the names you want. It does not make it true. Nadal only quits "tio prevent further injury" when he is being beaten fair and square, never when he is ahead.
You know? I can understand your frustration. You hate a player, deny his achievements and accuse him of all sorts of things but he keeps winning, breaking records and getting recognition from other players and fans. 16 GS, 237 weeks as #1, 4 MS trophies, PLUS 5 "Edberg Sportsmanship" awards, fan's favorite for 3 years in a row.... I know it is a bitter pill to swallow but getting angry and frustrated and making up crap will not change the facts. Learn to deal with it.... and keep participating.
As for your ONLY argument, H2H? WHO CARES? No one knows or even gives a rat's butt who had positive records against Laver, Borg or Sampras. All people who matter ocosider him the GOAT (or at least one of the two) and a try gentleman. When your little Rafa gets to 16Gs and is on top for more than 5 years, history will put him in the same category as Roger. When he gets 5 spostsmanship awards by the guys he beats we'll talk gentlemanship. In the mean time... keep participating.
Still to reference ONE video or press conference where he did that. I understand your resentment, it is normal when you just can't deal with the greatness of the guy you envy to the point of hatred. Keep participating.
@Bostero3771 I have no envy of federer, it is u federer fans that have a hatred for Nadal because he kept beating federer, and i was only responding to all the fedtards such as urself who constantly hate on Nadal and discredit him, Yes CRYING IS RUINING SOMEONES'S CEREMONY,OK? IT TOOK AWAY FROM NADALs victory and he was literally apologizing for beating crybaby federer. Federer is A POOR SPORTSMAN. Federer uses far more excuses then Nadal does.
No hatred for Nadal. Just stating facts. Nadal celebrated his AO title and it is in the records as a legitimate one. Not so with all the ones that beat or were beating Nadal clearly and had to see their voctories go into the records as "an injured Nadal..." or "when Nadal retired with an injury"... crying is a natural act, not a provoked one. Quitting to prevent the other player from getting a legitimate victory is being a VERY poor sportsman. Nadal has done it repeatedly.
@Bostero3771 no he didnt celebrate it. Ruining someones ceremony is far worse then retiring, ok? Nadal had to stand there and literally apologize. And yes u as well as most fed fans do have a hatred of Nadal. Fedtards FEAR Nadal because of what he has done to fed in the past. Crying and taking away someone else's moment is poor sportsman, something that stupid federer fans will never understand. Swearing at the umpire at the us open is also poor sportsmanship but i see u completely ignored that.
Yeah, I am sure the smile on Nadal's face was just solidarity and he went straing to his room to take anti-depressants.... calling names does not change the facts and only shows poor ability to produce decent arguments. Crying is a natural and uncontrollable act (just look at how many times it happens in all sports, NO ONE "plans" or "decides" to cry). Quitting when the other guy is beating you clearly is a deliberate act and the sign of lousy sportsmanship. Keep participating.
@Bostero3771 Crying is natural so he could have gone to the toilet or something instead of ruining someones ceremony. Federer has beaten Roddick 4 times in a major final, does roddick behave like that? Nadal hasnt ruined any of the ceremonies when federer beat him. Nadal is not a lousy sportsman and he gives his opponents credit most of the time, unlike roger who is full of arrogance. Even when fed lost ao Nadal at the AO, it was all about him and not about the guy who actually won.
You just don't get it man. Yes, crying is natural, but if you've read Fed's comments on the incident, he talks about how he couldn't stop crying because that's all he wanted to do. He was completely embarrassed and that only made him cry more. For anyone who has ever been in that situation, that's totally how it works. You don't want to cry, you want to put on a strong face. But once you start crying, you can't stop. And when all you want is to keep it in, it makes it even harder to do so.
Swearing at the umpire was totally wrong. He was pissed because Delpo was looking at his coach before deciding to challenge which is not permitted. Nevertheless it was wrong. So??? His peers STILL vote him for the sportsmanship award just like the people who really know (Sampras, Mac, Agassi, Stolle, Carrillo, Tennis Mag) vote him as the GOAT. You can give your Rafa the hhhhdmt awards for "most beloved player" and be happy with that. Still waiting for ONE case of Roger quitting to avoid losing..
And still waiting for ONE SINGLE time when Roger quit to ruin the other player's victory... you know the rest... 16 GS... 237 weeks.... 5 Edberg awards.... etc. FACTS, not opinions.
@Bostero3771 no he just cries to ruin another players victory and then behaves like a sore loser in the post match conference. If u go to any Nadal video, u can see fedtards posting rude comments about Nadal or discrediting his wins, or making excuses for federer. Just as federer is a crybaby himself, his fans arent any different. and oh remember u criticising Nadal for failing to beat davydenko a few months ago despite having match points. Well the same happened to fed today against Baghdatis.
People who say Federer only won his last three Slams because Nadal was not fit, are completely missing the point.
The point is, Nadal was never going to be fit for the French or Wimbledon in 2009. With a style of play as physical and agressive as his, he was always going to have injury lay-offs in his career,
Roger won the AO and Rafa was again "injured". It is becoming a habit when he is taking a whipping. Si, it is now 16 GS to 6, and BTW, Roger had 6 GS when he was Nadal's age, so that argument is dead now. Can anyone seriously believe Nadal is going to get 10 more majors???? That means getting 3 the next 2 years and 2 the following 2 or 2 per year for the next 5. Anyone who believes that is smoking the wrong stuff.
honestly who cares who has the better record and better style. or how they live they're lives. they are both amazing players that none of these big mouth fans could even dream of beating. i think people think to much into roger and rafas lives and try to one up each other by stating other peoples achievements besides they're own. everyone just needs to get off rafa and rog's balls and love watching them play.
and what i dont understand is since when nadal become the best when he has 10 gs less than federer, was at the position of number 2 for more than 2 years under federer, and was beaten far more times by many other players compare to federer who has a lot over 10 winnings against top players. Oh you mean Nadal is the best in grunting? Totally agreed. Btw, there is one thing I am happy to admit, nadal is the best on CLAY when he is FIT. the whole nadal is the best player in the era is crap.
tikealpzyx you are an idiot. i will say rafa is the best clay player ever but thats as far as ill go till he gets 16 majors, i highly doubt it, i love rafa and fed and hope the rival brings us more great tennis
sure call me crazy, because slams mean everything nowadays, there's no use getting through to you guys. Slams are everything, whether or not a player consistently loses to a particular opponent, a win is a win...even if its not against the best.
i retract calling you a name, but i value the fact the federer has lasted being dominate for so long, nadal has yet to do what fed has. nadal is great but can he last we will see.
funny that rog hasnt been playing his best tennis these last 18 months, and he has 3 GS's, nadal played arguably his best tennis from 2008 to the oz(in his career), and he has won 3 gs's. and you say nadal is the best on the planet?
Bubonikron, I would say Federer is the best because he has the most grand slam titles and he is still yet to win more. Nadal has 6. He and Federer always play interesting matches against each other. However, the times Nadal beats Federer is when Nadal plays well and Federer doesn't. Assuming they both play extremely well against each other, Federer would win. In OZ, Federer didn't play well. Same as Wimbledon. But realize, even when Nadal is playing better, Fed still pushes it to 5 sets.
Alright alright listen guys congrats to Federer, I'm truly happy to see him finally capture the French (albeit not at the expense of Nadal) Anyways, you can criticize me and what not which is fine, but no one really saw this coming. I guess thats the beauty of sport, Rafa was as sure a winner on clay as anyone to ever play, yet a determined Soderling finished him off. BUT I will say one thing, if Roger breaks the record at Wimb it should be against the best player today, it should be aganst Rafa
why should that be the case? it's not federer's fault that nadal is not taking care of himself hence the withdrawal. and besides it's federer's name that is more attached to the tourney so i'll say he still must be the man to beat there.
I never said it was Rogers fault for Nadals injuries for Madrid or Wimbledon. However, to suggest a man who hadnt won a tournament since October of 2008 in Basel in Federer was the man to beat as opposed to Rafa, arguably the GOAT of clay, who had been dominating all surfaces prior to his acing knee injury, is preposterous. Im a HUGE Fed fan, I enjoy his game and believe hes the greatest talent to ever play. However, to claim that Federer was the man to beat...c'mon, you know better than that.
if we're talking about the french open, yes you may have a point. but come on! at wimbledon? federer's kingdom where he reigned for almost 6 years losing by 9-7 in the 5th set? federer is still the man to beat in this tourney. nadal beat the man last year, doesn't automatically make him the man. this is not boxing.
Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said Fed was not the man to beat at Wimbledon (although youd be hard pressed 2 not put your money on Nadal had he played). You stated, innacurately might I add, that Roger was the man to beat in Madrid...you were wrong. I never said anything about Wimbledon, and Roger will likely be the favorite at the US. As for Roger's "kingdom", he lost his supremacy in '07 when Rafa nearly beat him, and in '08 Rafa was given the slight edge in the final watch the tape
did i say federer was the man to beat in madrid? lol read again fella. you said if fed was to beat pete's record he has to go through rafa. fed is due to break pete at wimbledon, and rafa is hardly the man to beat there. and yes i'd put my money on federer had nadal played. in fact i'd put my money on nadal getting knocked out early had he entered. losing at RG against The Sod was not good, and he's keen not to destroy further his psyche by losing early at wimbledon.
Alright enoughs enough, believe wat u want im not going to argue w a person whos so biased 2 the point of disilussionment. Federer hadnt won a tourney all year prior to Madrid, Rafa had been dusting up the competition. At this point, Rafa has surpassed Federer as the #1 player. An injury-free Rafa is better than Fed & u kno it. The AO final shattered Feds confidence and further enhanced his "Nadal complex". 05-07, sure it may be a different story, but at this point, Rafa is better, period.
yeah believe what you want too. fact is, federer is gunning for his 15th major now against roddick. and he doesn't need nadal's sorry ass to claim it. being healthy is part of the game, and that is where nadal fails miserably. and if roger wins, he is the king again at no. 1. sorry but nadal is just not too good to reign and dominate the way roger did.
Rafa has to prove himself as the man to beat for more than a year. So far he has done this only on clay, where has been slightly but consistently better that Federer.
So, Federer has already booked a place in history books as the greatest player ever and Nadal is 23 and already struggling with chronic knee problems that doctors say could affect his game for the rest of his career.
Everyone has ups and down but in the long run... you get my point. ;)
First of all dont talk about this GOAT crap, its unfair 2 other greats like Laver who was suspended from Open play for 5 yrs & Pete as well, who was just as impressive. You say Rafa was "slightly" better than Fed on clay..he was always better wat r u delusional lol. Roger is my favorite player but Rafa has been the #1 player for 2 yrs now, beating Roger on all surfaces (Idk that indicates to me your the better player). As far as Rafas knees, thats a totally different issue.
Dude, I'm going to break it down for you 'cause you obviously can't get what I said:
1) Nadal had been the man to beat BUT for a small period of time (a little more than a year). It's not enough, he has to prove himself for a few years to come.
2) I said that Nadal was slightly but consistently better on clay. Which means that he was always better but Fed was close, what's not clear about that?
Plus, there's no need to be rude to make a point, you just end up being ridiculous this way.
Being healthy is a part of the game. It would be really great if all players were totally injury-free for their whole careers but sadly, that's not the case.
Therefore, the health of a player is as much part of the story as anything else.
We all saw what Nadal has to go through or how much Federer's game was affected by the problems he had last year with his back.
Alright rudeness aside, you're right Rafa needs 2 sustain his dominance over time. However, youd be hardpressed 2 find many pple who agree with your clay case. Roger is an extraordinary player w more talent than anyone in history. HOWEVER, he never seems 2 alter his game when playing Nadal, almost as if to say, "Im Roger Federer, my best can beat anyone", which is not the case when he plays Rafa. Still hes the greatest talent Ive ever seen but the Rafa equation does complicate things
I agree with the tactics part. When Roger adapted his game to Rafa's game, he managed to beat Rafa on clay (which seemed impossible). So maybe he should have done this shift in tactics earlier.
As for the equation, yes, Rafa did complicate things but many greats had their nemesis. Since Roger has already earned a place in history, that's how I'd like to think of it. If Rafa becomes a legend too, then we'll be able to talk about a rivalry between legends. Doesn't it sound good? ;)
Yes well compare when their careers are over. I truly believe however, if Roger weren't so damned stubborn & changed his tactics earlier in his career he mightve won a couple more against Rafa. Fortunately, I think he finally realizes what he must do, & injury or no injury for Rafa, I like how he rly went for his shots in this final. There are a lot of questions surrounding Rafas game, I think hell bounce back, but lady luck seems 2 be shining brightly on Roger right now hes my pick 2 win the US
No, go to the ATP website and have a look at the rankings :-)
You know, you really are an enigma. You claim to be a big Federer fan and then as soon as someone else becomes #1 for a little while, its "OMFG Rafa Nadal is the best I've ever seen, u r delusional hahaha"
And since when has Rafa been the No. 1 player for two years? August 18th, 2008- July 5th 2009. Do you make that 2 years because I make that less than 11 months.
U obviously didnt get the sarcasm, I kno whos #1 in the rankings u idiot. Wen Ali came back from boxing after spending 2 yrs in prison from draftdodging everyone knew he was the best boxer, despite him not having the title. Rogers a legend & a great champion, but he hasnt been the best player in the world for just about 2 yrs now. And wat r u tlkin about 11 months, Rafa was better all of '08...last time I checked there r 12 months in a year lol. Delusional, please, ur a numbers guy, Im a realist
Clearly, you're unaware of how the ranking system works. Rafa has been #1 for 11 months. He became No. 1 in August of last year and lost his ranking in July of this year, so that means 11 months.
But ok, let's say that he was 'unofficially' the No. 1 since the clay season last year until the clay season this year. How does that make it 2 years? The last time I checked, Roger had won 3 slams in 2007 and the Masters Cup and had beaten Rafa 3 times in that year.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Haha don't belittle me, I understand the ranking system quite well. The fact that he didnt reach #1 until after Cincinnati makes no difference, tennis players & fans alike considered him the best player long before that, they even had interviews w many players who stated this. Maybe it hasnt been 2 yrs yet, but close to it. Let me ask you this, HAD Rafa Nadal played in the French & Wimbledon, who would have won...Had Muhammed Ali not gone to jail, who wouldve been the heavyweight champ?
Do you somehow feel better when you write "hahaha" on every other post? Just curious.....
Anyway, the question you asked is purely hypothetical and so has no place in such a discussion.
In the same way, you would have been convinced prior to Madrid that Rafa would have beaten Roger if they had met in the final. But life's unpredictable (as we see here) and there is no certainty that Rafa, nor Roger for that matter will definately win every slam they enter.
"Haha" (just to aggravate u). Listen let's just call it quits after this..theres 3 certainties in life, death, taxes, & Rafa(healthy) winnig the French. Yes, life's unpredictable so your point is valid. HOWEVER, despite wat many pple may believe, Rog has pressure in the USO. Should he lose to Rafa in the final, that wud be the 4th consecutive loss in a major & wud surely reignite the GOAT debate. I hope Rog doesnt lose his hunger after the birth of his child & sets the record straight at the US.
There is always pressure to an extent when you're defending a slam. However, Roger has nothing to prove to anyone in the USO. He has won 5 consecutive years, more than any other player in the open era. He is getting older and so to expect him to keep winning slam after slam after slam for the coming years is not necessarily realistic.
Whether he wins or not, he can hold is head up higher than anyone else and lay down the challenge: "Ok, I lost. Now let's see if any of you lot can do better"
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Valid point but Idt its that cut & dry. Roger, albeit a great champion, didnt hav 2 beat Rafa for either of his 2 slams this year (which I thought wud hav been more fitting). If Rafa makes the final, I think there is a considerable amount of pressure resting on Feds shoulders. Hes the only GOAT candidate to nothave a winnig record against his nemesis.That in itself is enough to sway an argument. The very argument Navratilova emphasized..r u the GOAT wen u may be the 2nd best of your generation
Well, Roger only has a chance to face Rafa if Rafa reaches the finals or enters the tournament. If he gets knocked out in the 4th round and doesn't enter the second slam, that's not Roger's problem.
Who gives a shit if Roger's H2H record is shit against Nadal? You are compared to the fucking ATP not to one fucking player. Last time I fucking checked, it takes 7 wins over 7 different players to win a Grand Slam, not "beat Nadal 7 times." If Roger only loses to one man a few times in Grand Slams yet Nadal loses consistently to many players, who would you rather choose? Fact is Federer only has 10 losses since his first Wimbledon win while Nadal already has 10 losses since Roland Garros 05
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
First of all, it doesnt matter how many times u curse in your comment, your argument is still flawed. It doesnt matter how many times your main rival beats you ass opposed to winnig against lesser opponents...sure it does! If Sampras lossed to Agassi more times than not, Petes' legacy wud be different. Same with Borg-Mcenroe, Laver-Rosewall...Roger is a great player, my favorite player, but when his legacy is compared to others, that will be the asterisk...the lopsided H2H against Rafa.
tikealpzyx you act like your so righteous and right. Then why is it that nearly 99% of tennis players do not agree with your "arguments." I just told you, Nadal has already compiled 10 losses since his 2005 RG win (not including 2 withdraws), and Federer has 10 losses since his 2003 Wimby win. H2H MEANS NOTHING unless both players have nearly equal stats. If that was the case Richard Krijicek is a greater tennis player than Sampras. John McEnroe is equal to Borg. Borg is better than Laver.
What ever it is that you are saying, the facts remain. Rafael has beaten Fed on all surfaces. He has beaten him on 5 Grand Slams on all surfaces and even on Fed's territory Wimbledon. Roger has never beaten Rafa on a GS outside grass! Federer has lost most of their matches; Rafa holds a head 2 head over all players (Nalbandian one match to go)!! Rafael is the best. Even with injuries (twice this year) he has won 5 big titles (Roger 4) and Roger only won GS where Rafael was not there to stop him.
and of course Roger hasn't beaten Rafa on a GS outside Grass. That's because Nadal never made it to the australian open final until 2009 (not Federers fault), Nadal didn't make it to the French Open final this year (Federer was there, where was Nadal?) and Nadal has NEVER made it to the US Open Final (again, not Federers fault).
@MetallicaManify nadal is federer's slave? Thats why Federer is 2-6 in majors vs Nadal? That is why Nadal made federer cry infront on millions of people in Ao.
Yes, Federer cried because he lost to Nadal. But Federer's done that too. Nadal cried in the locker room at Wimbledon 2007 because he lost to Federer. Nadal also cried because he was so upset that he wouldn't ever be like Federer sometime in 2006. He admitted all of these times, so I'm not making this up
Well, that lopsided H2H doesn't tell the whole story, because most of their matches have been on Rafa's favorite surface, clay, which happens to be Fed's worst surface. But still, year after year he managed to get to the final of RG and other Masters on clay. And Rafa?? Do you honestly believe that H2H would look like that if they met more frequently on hard courts, or even US Open, which is, alongside grass, Fed's favorite surface???
Probably not, I was just stating facts, but if you want to get into hypotheticals, yeah, Roger's a better- all-court player, so if they meet on other surfaces the H2H will probaly even out. I think Rafa might've been able to squeak some on the slow hardcourts of Australia, but as far as US and Wimbledon, I'd take Fed.
in ~3 yrs nadal and fed have met in 7 slam finals. none of the other GOAT candidates had rivals of that stature, and even then Nadal couldn't half match Federer's consistency. It's to Nadal's detriment obviously that he couldn't get to more hard court finals (especially before fed's "slump"), and that he lost in this yr's FO and federer didn't. I can't believe you're holding that against federer! you have issues. no one is doubting nadal's class here, but he's easily not better than federer.
even though this is old and i know Roger won! ..it still makes me feel tense and nervous lol . I got used to seeing roger give away break points and falter at the finishing line. Roger has to combat his nerves ..thats whats affected his previous encounters with Nadal. He said it in his own words after winning Roland Garros .. "some games are almost unplayable" ..because he feels immensely nervous .
I agree %100. I hope with the FO and his 14th out of the way, he can play a bit more at ease again. I've been going to great lengths to watch some of his older matches, because he just had more fun a few years ago. But it's been as though he's playing a different game, one that gives him no joy. Makes you wanna buy the man a beer or something!
Yeah.. i hope so too, but there are so many jealous ex players who come up with new pressures for him. Ive notice whenever roger comes through some record or pressure..they dont feel happy about it and they come up with a new one instantly to put more pressure on him. Straight after he won FO, Mcenroe said now he has to beat Sampras's record at Wimbledon.. its like give the guy some breathing space! they think all this is easy for him, but he still feels the nerve of a first timer out there.
federer isn't even sweating
tjstrott25 5 months ago
Think many people are forgetting that the day before, Nadal fought a war against Djokovic for 4 hours. Don't get me wrong, I love Fed, but he was a bit lucky that Nadal was out of gas this day.
kribiboy 1 year ago
@kribiboy
Sure, always an excuse whenever Nadal loses.
Ryan81M 1 year ago
@kribiboy Nadal and Djokovic played 59 minutes of actual tennis. He was not "gassed" as people would like to believe.
3timeMVPNash 2 months ago
The point from 0:34 to 0:55 is probably one of the most tactical play ever. If you look at it analytically, you clearly see how Nadal tries to avoid hitting into Fed's forehand, and is continuously hitting into the backhand side. Fed is aware of it and decides to play the same game, continuously hitting into Nadal's backhand as well until it unfooted him. 90% of the point was played on the backhand side. It's nice to see that they're not only forehand-hitters, but also great strategist.
Gunthix209 1 year ago
@Gunthix209 Every time Fed has beaten Rafa, especially the past two years at WTF, he has attacked Rafa's BH viciously. He needs to keep doing that.
3timeMVPNash 2 months ago
I don't understand why or how people are so divided about these two. I love them both! There both fucking awesome players. People these days...
shamalot44 1 year ago
federer 15 nadal 7 grandslams titel
federer is the world best player in history
nadal would be the best claycourt in history by beating soderling at the final
gewooneerlijk 1 year ago
@gewooneerlijk Federer has 16 slams
AndyRoddick70 1 year ago
Don't worry Rafa you nailed em this year ;)
Sundin456 1 year ago
nadal's king now, three masters on clay in one year, a record!
jzrnsk 1 year ago
The Complete Federer Arsenal was working flawlessly that day. Especially the backhand down-the-line. Undefeatable.
swupstik 1 year ago
no mercy from the god. I've never seen federer be as aggressive as he was in this match, trying to completely deteriorate nadal's backhand.
m0squit0fac3 1 year ago
I like how Nadal didn't even bother to look at Roger when they met at the net after Roger won. He looked positively disappointed, which is understandable since it's his home surface; his home town.
Sonic2710 1 year ago
when u have won 3 australian opens and the other guy wins his first, and u take HIS moment away from him by crying and making everyone feel bad for you, YOU ARE a poor sportsman
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
LOL whatever dude. You can't say that Federer cried on purpose to ruin Nadal's moment. There is no reason that one would think that except that they are just grasping for reasons to badmouth him.
You're calling Federer fans rude and such when you're posting comments like this? You sir, are a hypocrite and I suggest you read your own comments before you insult others for theirs. You are completely fabricating a reason for Federer's tears to make him sound bad. Get the fuck over yourself, loser.
dwilliams02 1 year ago
@dwilliams02 i really dont know what to make of your post. On one hand you start insulting me in the first post, and on the other hand u sound like a decent guy in the second post. Maybe i did go overboard with my comments but i was pissed off after reading some of the other rude comments.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Yeah you're totally right. My bad. I too was guilty of being pissed immediately after reading your post. I just think it's ridiculous to say the guy purposely cried to ruin Nadal's moment. It's one thing to make fun of him for crying, but it's another to assign false motive. But yeah, my bad for dissing you and cursing at you, that was 100% uncalled for. In any case, here's to a possible Nadal-Fed final in Miami.
dwilliams02 1 year ago
And for the record, I am indeed a Federer fan, but I do not hate or even dislike Nadal because I respect how great a player is when he's healthy. I can't tell you how hopeful I am that he can get back to the top of his game so we can see some more epic matches between the two. But you're right, Federer fans do fear Nadal because he certainly has our guy's number. But all of that aside, just because you see Fed fans badmouth your guy, you don't have to respond in kind. Be the bigger man PLEASE.
dwilliams02 1 year ago
It's not about Australian Opens, you fucking retard. It's about Federer finally getting confident about returning to Number 1, and making his invincible form once again. Not to mention he had lost to Nadal so many times already. Do you honestly think Federer did it on purpose? You, sir, are trying to discredit Federer falsely? Federer just felt at the lowest point of having lost another final. Guess what? Nadal cried in Wimbledon 2007. So what the hell are you saying?
Sonic2710 1 year ago
@Sonic2710 I was annoyed with Federer at the time, but I do get the frustration and disappointment of the moment and it no longer bothers me. The main difference between Nadal Wimbledon 2007 and Federer AO 2008 is that the only reason we know about Rafa is that he told us, he cried in private and did not detract from Federer's winning moment, that's the big difference.
2charliep 1 year ago
if nadal isnt al least at in the 90% tile of his capabilities fed will play his max to death and put you on a slab for your corpse to rot when hes in the shadows hitting backhands its so perfect
oxford69dictionary 1 year ago
what classy player takes shots at younger players like he has done with Djokovic and Murray? What classy player swears at the umpire? What classy player ruins someones elses presentation ceremeony or smashes his racket?
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Rafa's only shot at another slam is this year's French...i know it sounds ridiculous but his game is so demanding (physically and mentally) that he would have to be alien to repeat the kind of success he had in '08. Rafa's run that year reminds me a little bit of Muster's in '96 (Rafa is a more complete player of course). 50/50 he wins another slam in my opinion.
joydivsion77 2 years ago
federer had won 5 grand slams when he JUST turned 24...
rafa is about to turn 24 and he has currently achieved 6 grand slams...plus he has the chance to make it 7 at the french open before his 24th birthday...so they are very equal. but federer then went on to have MASSIVE seasons in 06 and 07..winning 6 out of 8 grand slams in both years together. if you think that rafa can replicate that sort of form..then thats ur opinion. but, for me, he is not good enough an all rounder to be able to...
AlphaDraconis7 2 years ago
federer will go down as the GOAT...
i think rafa will win a few more slams..but he wont be in the greatest of all time debate..no way. nadal's tennis is simple..it all relies on his physical strength..running down anything and everything your opponent hits..and forcing him into mistakes. thats how rafa won 3 of his 4 french opens (the 4th he actually won through great execution of tactics and mixing up his approach)...
nadal is one dimensional...federer is the best.
AlphaDraconis7 2 years ago 2
not saying to defend nadal but watch swissgenius's "gallary of grinders"
joojy 2 years ago
federer beat nadal fair and square.
just like soderling beat rafa fair and square..there were no injuries. rafa beat soderling 6-0 6-1 in rome only 2 weeks prior to the french open...soderling just outplayed nadal in the fo..plain and simple.
federer's record in slams far outweights nadal's..federer has reached 18 of the last 19 grand slam finals..and reached the last 23 grand semi finals at least...the BEST rafa has ever achieved is 5 semi's in a row...which just isn't as good...
AlphaDraconis7 2 years ago 2
Rafa, Roger etc... we can of course prefer one of them but if the rival win, just have to say well done. ! Try to look after excuse when your favorite player loose is just stupid. Keep a good spirit as Roger AND Rafa !
pasonam 2 years ago
When you win a final, you don't just win the final but all the tournament. It means that you handle your tournament very well round after round...from the first round to the finalWhen Fed won the french open, he had a big semi against Del Po (and in five sets) a very diffcult round against Haas...etc... He still won. Well done.And when Rafa won the Australian this 2009 year, he had a hughe semi against Verdasco. He still won the final. Well done !
pasonam 2 years ago
Sorry for my bad english...To be a tennis champion is also being able to handle your carrer in the good and bad moments (personal's problems, physical's problems etc...) If you re not able to do that, it can't be an excuse....Winning a tournament is also to be able to win all your matches and keep some physical and mental energy round after round... Yes Nadal had a BIg semi against Djokovic...is it an excuse ? Surely not.
.
pasonam 2 years ago
That dropshot at 2:46 is stunning, there must have been a local tornado blowing against the direction of the ball
Elwink 2 years ago
At RG 2009, Nadal came from beating Soderling 6-0, 6-1 in Rome and giving Hewitt, a former #1 a master class on clay court tennis. He declares he is "slightly below" his level of 2008 when he won RG without dropping a set. Suddenly, the Swede comes out firing from both wings and Nadal can't respond to the flat bombs Soderling is throwing at him. He loses, fair and square, and ... surprise "he was injured"... same story at the USO (vs Delpo) and AO (vs Murray). He is only fit when he wins?
Bostero3771 2 years ago
Bostero3771, you ARE the man ... huge fan of your comment ... I totally agree.
jonatev00 2 years ago
@Bostero3771 when is hewitt a master on claycourts? Hewitt was well past his best anyway. Yes Nadal was injured, that is why he had to undergo traetment after the french. Federer is the crybaby who makes excuses like his mono or his "back injury" at the Ao.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
hhhhdmt,
You know what else is crap? All these lousy comments you've been posting. Bostero3771 never said Hewitt was a master at clay courts. He said Nadal gave Hewitt a master class on the clay courts. You really need to brush up on your reading skills. And how is it possible that in Wimby 08, it was because Federer was in bad shape that got him to the finals without dropping a set? That's impossible. He would've lost a lot of sets if he was in bad form. Stop saying crap you don't know about.
natbrain 1 year ago
@natbrain I am not saying crap i dont know about, u are the one who needs to brush on on your reading skills. Bostero was trying to claim that federer was in bad form in Wimby 08, i was ASKING HIM HOW CAN FEDERER BE IN BAD FORM WHEN HE REACHES THE FINAL OF A GS WITHOUT LOSING A SET. Thats the point, he wasnt in bad form in WIMBY 08.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
You're only talking about Wimbledon 2008. Look at the other tournaments he competed in! He lost to Karlovic, Stepanek, Gilles Simon, and even Guillermo Canas! He was more or less speaking of the general season of his career. He said "when he lost to Wimby to Nadal, he was probably in the worst mental shape of his career, losing to guys like..." He wasn't talking about JUST WIMBY! He was talking about his horrible 2008 season. Fed won ONE GS that year! It was because he got mono!
natbrain 1 year ago
@natbrain u know it is amazing how he can play through "mono", and still reach gs finals, he must be superman. and u know even if he lost to other players on hardcourts, he was playing very well at wimbledon 08 because it was on a surface where he was the defending champion, where he didnt expect to lose. I dont believe he won one gs because of mono, i believe it was because the competition had gotten better then it was in 07 or 06.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
@hhhhdmt, everyone has there ups and downs in their careers. That's something so amazing about Federer's game. Even though Federer may not be playing well, he can still take a match to a 5th set or a 3rd set, depending on the occasion. Competition had gotten better in 2007, and with his mono and that competition, it would be very difficult to win. Look at Fed's 2006 and 2007 RG scores against Rafa. 4 sets. But in 08, it was 6-1 6-3 6-0. Rafa got better, but Fed's health was also a factor
natbrain 1 year ago
Watch the press conference after the Hewitt match. No mention whatsoever of any injury or even a small physical inconvenient. Surprisingly, he gets treatment every time he takes a solid beating... maybe it is psychological treatment?
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 Maybe its fed who needs to get psychological treatment, after all everytime he loses, its because of "mono", his back injury, or the light being bad. Federer also came up with his "mono" story AFTER losing to Djokovic in AO 08 when he had no answer for the serb.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Susrprising, you have not been able to quote ONE SINGLE time Fedex has either quit a match because of injury or used it as an excuse. Not even his loss to Djoko on the AO match. Never mentioned in the post-match interview or in subsequent days. The diagnosis with Mono came more than a month later after he continued feeling fatigue and being slow in all matches. No need to give the examples for Nadal quitting or coming up woth "injury" excuses again. Everyone knows them well.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 his "mono" is a pile or rubbish. You cannot simply decide to play through mono. Ask Mario ancic. He did use the mono excuse. Nadal quit once against Murray to PREVENT FURTHER INJURY if u can understand that. Nadal played last years US OPEN with an abdominal strain and lost to delpo, but he DID NOT USE IT AS AN EXCUSE. Nadal rarely makes excuses unlike Federer who is the king of excuses, "oh the light was bad at wimby," "my mono" "I gave the match to him".
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
His mono was diagnosed and you still have to quote ONE SINGLE match that Federer quit or where he blame injuries for a loss.... keep trying.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 he blamed mono for the loss against Djokovic, bad light for the match against Nadal at wimby and so on. I already have said this, its a pity u cant read.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
I know what you have said. Pity it is not true. Keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 yes it is true.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Mono diagnosed a few months after the AO. Watch interview with Johnnie Mac after WImby. Never quit a match. Nadal has done plenty of that. Keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 what plenty of that? How many times?
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Plenty of quitting while being beaten or blaming "injuries" that were not present the day before. Really, how many times do I need to mention them? Davydenko, Delpo, Soderling, Murray (3 times), even Monaco!!! and those are just the ones I recall from memory.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 why do u keep mentioning delpotro? Have u seen the post match conference after that match when Nadal refused to blame any injury? Federer's "mono" was not present before he lost to djokovic, again i will ask how many times has Nadal actually retired from a match?
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Yes it was. All the reports say that Federer was diagnosed with mono before the Australian Open and although he did not have it during the actual tournament, it surely must have affected his training going in.
I respect you hhh because you seem to know what you're talking about most of the time, but this and the comment saying that Federer cried on purpose to steal Nadal's moment? Dude, you make it hard to respect your comments when you make shit up like that. Just stick to the facts.
dwilliams02 1 year ago 2
BTW, Nadal also quit against Davydenko and Monaco and blamed "injuries: for his losses to Soderling at RG, Murray at USO and Rotterdam in addition to the two you mention. Strangely enough, he was not "injured" in any of the previous matches... no matter how hard you try, the facts are there. ROger NEVER quit a match and NEVER blamed injuries. Nadal has made a career of it.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 ROGER ALWAYS BLAMES HIS INJURIES and is far more of a sore loser then Nadal is. The post match press conferences that he has done shows that.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
False. Keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
The excuse that Nadal was not at his best is ridiculous. He was coming from 33 matches won on Clay, winning the AO, Indian Wells, Montecarlo and Rome. He was in the best shape of his life. Federer, on the other hand, when he lost Wimby to Nadal was probably in the worst mental shape of his career losing to guys like Karlovic, Fish, Stepanek, Roddick (for the first time in 16 matches) and winning only two minor tournaments: Estoril and Halle. Difference? He did not claim "injuries".
Bostero3771 2 years ago 2
@Bostero3771 yes he did. He started crying about the light and his "Mono"
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
No he did not. The inrterview with Jonnie Mac and the press conference are clear. He said "Rafa was just too solid and served very well today, I tried everything but it did not work". Then look at the press conference of Nadal after the Soderling match at RG and compare. Those are there for everyone to see.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 why dont u watch the post match interview after australian open 09 final when fed said that he "gave" the match to Nadal? Real classy, eh?
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Saying "he gave the match" is a tennis strategy or execution statement admitting oone's own failure to execute (just like Nadal does after losing to Soderling at RG). VERY different from claiming "injuries"... no need to quote the examples again.... Murray, Davydenko......etc, etc.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
Oh, BTW, after his match last night, ROger was awarded the "Stephan Edberg Sportsmanship Award" for the 5th consecutive year. Who votes? all players on the ATP tour. THAT is real classy.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 yeah fed is a great sportsman. Swearing at the umpire at the us open,ruining Nadals win at the australian open 09 by crying like a 5 year old, acting like a sore loser in the press conference after the match, repeatedly taking shots at younger players like Djokovic and Murray, smashing his racket in miami, yeah real classy. Federer's post match conference after the australian open 09 is far worse then any conference Nadal has ever given(yes even the FO 09).
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
HE IS a classy player. UNICEF Ambassador, voted by his peers for 5 consecutive years. Nadal??? Still waiting for ONE of those awards. I know it is hard for you to digest the facts but no matter whatt you write, they are still there: 16 GS, 237 consecutive wks as #1, most GS consecutive finals and semis, only player to win TWO GS 5 consecutive yrs. (plus a few more records) AND Spoortsman of the yr AND fan's favorite for the 3rd year. Nadal??? Still trying....
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 he IS NOT CLASSY, he is an arrogant sportsman, taking shots at murray and djokovic, ruining Nadal's ceremony. Can u name me once that Nadal ruined federer or someone else's presentation ceremony? NO.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Strangely enough both Djoko and Murray always say he is a a gentleman and example for other players to follow... crying after a match? plenty of examples of that in many sports. Nopt a provoked act and hardly aimed at "ruining: someone's ceremony. The worst way to ruin someone's victory is by quitting and claim injuries when the other player is giving you a solid whipping. Your little Rafa has plenty of that.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 no he hasnt. YES FEDERER DID RUIN NADALS CEREMONY AND HE WAS A SORE LOSER IN THE POST MATCH CONFERENCE TOO. For the BILLIONTH TIME, Nadal retired against Murray to prevent further injury, got it? Oh no u cant since u are a fedtard.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
You can repeat it a TRILLIONTH time and call me all the names you want. It does not make it true. Nadal only quits "tio prevent further injury" when he is being beaten fair and square, never when he is ahead.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
You know? I can understand your frustration. You hate a player, deny his achievements and accuse him of all sorts of things but he keeps winning, breaking records and getting recognition from other players and fans. 16 GS, 237 weeks as #1, 4 MS trophies, PLUS 5 "Edberg Sportsmanship" awards, fan's favorite for 3 years in a row.... I know it is a bitter pill to swallow but getting angry and frustrated and making up crap will not change the facts. Learn to deal with it.... and keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
As for your ONLY argument, H2H? WHO CARES? No one knows or even gives a rat's butt who had positive records against Laver, Borg or Sampras. All people who matter ocosider him the GOAT (or at least one of the two) and a try gentleman. When your little Rafa gets to 16Gs and is on top for more than 5 years, history will put him in the same category as Roger. When he gets 5 spostsmanship awards by the guys he beats we'll talk gentlemanship. In the mean time... keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
Still to reference ONE video or press conference where he did that. I understand your resentment, it is normal when you just can't deal with the greatness of the guy you envy to the point of hatred. Keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 I have no envy of federer, it is u federer fans that have a hatred for Nadal because he kept beating federer, and i was only responding to all the fedtards such as urself who constantly hate on Nadal and discredit him, Yes CRYING IS RUINING SOMEONES'S CEREMONY,OK? IT TOOK AWAY FROM NADALs victory and he was literally apologizing for beating crybaby federer. Federer is A POOR SPORTSMAN. Federer uses far more excuses then Nadal does.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
No hatred for Nadal. Just stating facts. Nadal celebrated his AO title and it is in the records as a legitimate one. Not so with all the ones that beat or were beating Nadal clearly and had to see their voctories go into the records as "an injured Nadal..." or "when Nadal retired with an injury"... crying is a natural act, not a provoked one. Quitting to prevent the other player from getting a legitimate victory is being a VERY poor sportsman. Nadal has done it repeatedly.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 no he didnt celebrate it. Ruining someones ceremony is far worse then retiring, ok? Nadal had to stand there and literally apologize. And yes u as well as most fed fans do have a hatred of Nadal. Fedtards FEAR Nadal because of what he has done to fed in the past. Crying and taking away someone else's moment is poor sportsman, something that stupid federer fans will never understand. Swearing at the umpire at the us open is also poor sportsmanship but i see u completely ignored that.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Yeah, I am sure the smile on Nadal's face was just solidarity and he went straing to his room to take anti-depressants.... calling names does not change the facts and only shows poor ability to produce decent arguments. Crying is a natural and uncontrollable act (just look at how many times it happens in all sports, NO ONE "plans" or "decides" to cry). Quitting when the other guy is beating you clearly is a deliberate act and the sign of lousy sportsmanship. Keep participating.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 Crying is natural so he could have gone to the toilet or something instead of ruining someones ceremony. Federer has beaten Roddick 4 times in a major final, does roddick behave like that? Nadal hasnt ruined any of the ceremonies when federer beat him. Nadal is not a lousy sportsman and he gives his opponents credit most of the time, unlike roger who is full of arrogance. Even when fed lost ao Nadal at the AO, it was all about him and not about the guy who actually won.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
You just don't get it man. Yes, crying is natural, but if you've read Fed's comments on the incident, he talks about how he couldn't stop crying because that's all he wanted to do. He was completely embarrassed and that only made him cry more. For anyone who has ever been in that situation, that's totally how it works. You don't want to cry, you want to put on a strong face. But once you start crying, you can't stop. And when all you want is to keep it in, it makes it even harder to do so.
dwilliams02 1 year ago
Swearing at the umpire was totally wrong. He was pissed because Delpo was looking at his coach before deciding to challenge which is not permitted. Nevertheless it was wrong. So??? His peers STILL vote him for the sportsmanship award just like the people who really know (Sampras, Mac, Agassi, Stolle, Carrillo, Tennis Mag) vote him as the GOAT. You can give your Rafa the hhhhdmt awards for "most beloved player" and be happy with that. Still waiting for ONE case of Roger quitting to avoid losing..
Bostero3771 1 year ago
And still waiting for ONE SINGLE time when Roger quit to ruin the other player's victory... you know the rest... 16 GS... 237 weeks.... 5 Edberg awards.... etc. FACTS, not opinions.
Bostero3771 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 no he just cries to ruin another players victory and then behaves like a sore loser in the post match conference. If u go to any Nadal video, u can see fedtards posting rude comments about Nadal or discrediting his wins, or making excuses for federer. Just as federer is a crybaby himself, his fans arent any different. and oh remember u criticising Nadal for failing to beat davydenko a few months ago despite having match points. Well the same happened to fed today against Baghdatis.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
@Bostero3771 yeah federer was in really bad shape in wimbledon 08, thats why he reached the final without losing a goddamn set, yeah really bad form.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
People who say Federer only won his last three Slams because Nadal was not fit, are completely missing the point.
The point is, Nadal was never going to be fit for the French or Wimbledon in 2009. With a style of play as physical and agressive as his, he was always going to have injury lay-offs in his career,
athull08 2 years ago 4
Roger won the AO and Rafa was again "injured". It is becoming a habit when he is taking a whipping. Si, it is now 16 GS to 6, and BTW, Roger had 6 GS when he was Nadal's age, so that argument is dead now. Can anyone seriously believe Nadal is going to get 10 more majors???? That means getting 3 the next 2 years and 2 the following 2 or 2 per year for the next 5. Anyone who believes that is smoking the wrong stuff.
Bostero3771 2 years ago 3
hahahah good call
MattS04hias 2 years ago
more majors than you won..lol
binaryhex1 2 years ago
Roger has more majors not just than me, more than anyone in history. What is your point? or you just had to write something?
Bostero3771 2 years ago
binaryhex1, you're writing stupid things
jonatev00 2 years ago
honestly who cares who has the better record and better style. or how they live they're lives. they are both amazing players that none of these big mouth fans could even dream of beating. i think people think to much into roger and rafas lives and try to one up each other by stating other peoples achievements besides they're own. everyone just needs to get off rafa and rog's balls and love watching them play.
binaryhex1 2 years ago
@Bostero3771 I smoke trees lol
sorjaijayxd 2 years ago
This match was fed's turning point this year :)a mental boost he needed,i just cant wait for australia :D:D
Danath23 2 years ago 11
good vid..at least i can see the ball
MapleDynasty 2 years ago 5
roger can beat anyone if hes in the mood
animaanimaanima 2 years ago 7
lol look were nadal is on federers 2nd serve. 15 feet behind the baseline LOL
piesek56 2 years ago 4
and what i dont understand is since when nadal become the best when he has 10 gs less than federer, was at the position of number 2 for more than 2 years under federer, and was beaten far more times by many other players compare to federer who has a lot over 10 winnings against top players. Oh you mean Nadal is the best in grunting? Totally agreed. Btw, there is one thing I am happy to admit, nadal is the best on CLAY when he is FIT. the whole nadal is the best player in the era is crap.
andy316800 2 years ago 3
he's not even the best grunter. he sounds like a 15 year old with down syndrome trying to hump a door knob
butterflycaught900 2 years ago
just watching it agian, and really this is an awesome match! i hope we see more fed vs nadal, just so good
firedancerart 2 years ago 4
This video is pretty good quality for a clay court match on youtube. On most other vids you can't even see the ball!
eggsngaming 2 years ago 3
tikealpzyx you are an idiot. i will say rafa is the best clay player ever but thats as far as ill go till he gets 16 majors, i highly doubt it, i love rafa and fed and hope the rival brings us more great tennis
firedancerart 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
sure call me crazy, because slams mean everything nowadays, there's no use getting through to you guys. Slams are everything, whether or not a player consistently loses to a particular opponent, a win is a win...even if its not against the best.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
i retract calling you a name, but i value the fact the federer has lasted being dominate for so long, nadal has yet to do what fed has. nadal is great but can he last we will see.
firedancerart 2 years ago
i dont think he can, nadals game is so physically oriented, he has already had problems with his knees. But he might prove me wrong.
kevmaster 2 years ago
Yes hahahaha, compare Fed first 7 years to Rafa's ...
YoSoyZuri 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rafael is the best tennis player and the KING OF CLAY!!
YoSoyZuri 2 years ago
Thats the play by Federer that i like!
Backhand vs Backhand!!
and not Backhand vs Forehand like the AO!!
Jaishankar100 2 years ago 4
too bad that asterisk probly wont exist
Bubonikron 2 years ago
funny that rog hasnt been playing his best tennis these last 18 months, and he has 3 GS's, nadal played arguably his best tennis from 2008 to the oz(in his career), and he has won 3 gs's. and you say nadal is the best on the planet?
Bubonikron 2 years ago 6
Bubonikron, I would say Federer is the best because he has the most grand slam titles and he is still yet to win more. Nadal has 6. He and Federer always play interesting matches against each other. However, the times Nadal beats Federer is when Nadal plays well and Federer doesn't. Assuming they both play extremely well against each other, Federer would win. In OZ, Federer didn't play well. Same as Wimbledon. But realize, even when Nadal is playing better, Fed still pushes it to 5 sets.
natbrain 2 years ago
true
MattS04hias 2 years ago 4
@natbrain what utter crap. Everytime Nadal beats fed, fed is not playing well. Rubbish.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
tikealpzyx just shut the fuck up u rafa dick rider
ANTOINETYC 2 years ago 2
Federer with good serve and steady backhand = Invencible!
fmvgomes 2 years ago 4
why does nadal have to make that annoying ah~ ah~ sound for every single ball?????? it's so annoying to hear him shouting...
polychronio 2 years ago
Hopefully the two will be in the Wimbledon final. It would be a shame if either one was missing.
ninja2koo 2 years ago
Alright alright listen guys congrats to Federer, I'm truly happy to see him finally capture the French (albeit not at the expense of Nadal) Anyways, you can criticize me and what not which is fine, but no one really saw this coming. I guess thats the beauty of sport, Rafa was as sure a winner on clay as anyone to ever play, yet a determined Soderling finished him off. BUT I will say one thing, if Roger breaks the record at Wimb it should be against the best player today, it should be aganst Rafa
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
why should that be the case? it's not federer's fault that nadal is not taking care of himself hence the withdrawal. and besides it's federer's name that is more attached to the tourney so i'll say he still must be the man to beat there.
kakashi1300 2 years ago
I never said it was Rogers fault for Nadals injuries for Madrid or Wimbledon. However, to suggest a man who hadnt won a tournament since October of 2008 in Basel in Federer was the man to beat as opposed to Rafa, arguably the GOAT of clay, who had been dominating all surfaces prior to his acing knee injury, is preposterous. Im a HUGE Fed fan, I enjoy his game and believe hes the greatest talent to ever play. However, to claim that Federer was the man to beat...c'mon, you know better than that.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
if we're talking about the french open, yes you may have a point. but come on! at wimbledon? federer's kingdom where he reigned for almost 6 years losing by 9-7 in the 5th set? federer is still the man to beat in this tourney. nadal beat the man last year, doesn't automatically make him the man. this is not boxing.
kakashi1300 2 years ago 2
Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said Fed was not the man to beat at Wimbledon (although youd be hard pressed 2 not put your money on Nadal had he played). You stated, innacurately might I add, that Roger was the man to beat in Madrid...you were wrong. I never said anything about Wimbledon, and Roger will likely be the favorite at the US. As for Roger's "kingdom", he lost his supremacy in '07 when Rafa nearly beat him, and in '08 Rafa was given the slight edge in the final watch the tape
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
did i say federer was the man to beat in madrid? lol read again fella. you said if fed was to beat pete's record he has to go through rafa. fed is due to break pete at wimbledon, and rafa is hardly the man to beat there. and yes i'd put my money on federer had nadal played. in fact i'd put my money on nadal getting knocked out early had he entered. losing at RG against The Sod was not good, and he's keen not to destroy further his psyche by losing early at wimbledon.
kakashi1300 2 years ago
Alright enoughs enough, believe wat u want im not going to argue w a person whos so biased 2 the point of disilussionment. Federer hadnt won a tourney all year prior to Madrid, Rafa had been dusting up the competition. At this point, Rafa has surpassed Federer as the #1 player. An injury-free Rafa is better than Fed & u kno it. The AO final shattered Feds confidence and further enhanced his "Nadal complex". 05-07, sure it may be a different story, but at this point, Rafa is better, period.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
yeah believe what you want too. fact is, federer is gunning for his 15th major now against roddick. and he doesn't need nadal's sorry ass to claim it. being healthy is part of the game, and that is where nadal fails miserably. and if roger wins, he is the king again at no. 1. sorry but nadal is just not too good to reign and dominate the way roger did.
kakashi1300 2 years ago
Rafa has to prove himself as the man to beat for more than a year. So far he has done this only on clay, where has been slightly but consistently better that Federer.
So, Federer has already booked a place in history books as the greatest player ever and Nadal is 23 and already struggling with chronic knee problems that doctors say could affect his game for the rest of his career.
Everyone has ups and down but in the long run... you get my point. ;)
tritonboy13 2 years ago
First of all dont talk about this GOAT crap, its unfair 2 other greats like Laver who was suspended from Open play for 5 yrs & Pete as well, who was just as impressive. You say Rafa was "slightly" better than Fed on clay..he was always better wat r u delusional lol. Roger is my favorite player but Rafa has been the #1 player for 2 yrs now, beating Roger on all surfaces (Idk that indicates to me your the better player). As far as Rafas knees, thats a totally different issue.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
Dude, I'm going to break it down for you 'cause you obviously can't get what I said:
1) Nadal had been the man to beat BUT for a small period of time (a little more than a year). It's not enough, he has to prove himself for a few years to come.
2) I said that Nadal was slightly but consistently better on clay. Which means that he was always better but Fed was close, what's not clear about that?
Plus, there's no need to be rude to make a point, you just end up being ridiculous this way.
tritonboy13 2 years ago
And another thing:
Being healthy is a part of the game. It would be really great if all players were totally injury-free for their whole careers but sadly, that's not the case.
Therefore, the health of a player is as much part of the story as anything else.
We all saw what Nadal has to go through or how much Federer's game was affected by the problems he had last year with his back.
tritonboy13 2 years ago
Alright rudeness aside, you're right Rafa needs 2 sustain his dominance over time. However, youd be hardpressed 2 find many pple who agree with your clay case. Roger is an extraordinary player w more talent than anyone in history. HOWEVER, he never seems 2 alter his game when playing Nadal, almost as if to say, "Im Roger Federer, my best can beat anyone", which is not the case when he plays Rafa. Still hes the greatest talent Ive ever seen but the Rafa equation does complicate things
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
I agree with the tactics part. When Roger adapted his game to Rafa's game, he managed to beat Rafa on clay (which seemed impossible). So maybe he should have done this shift in tactics earlier.
As for the equation, yes, Rafa did complicate things but many greats had their nemesis. Since Roger has already earned a place in history, that's how I'd like to think of it. If Rafa becomes a legend too, then we'll be able to talk about a rivalry between legends. Doesn't it sound good? ;)
tritonboy13 2 years ago
Yes well compare when their careers are over. I truly believe however, if Roger weren't so damned stubborn & changed his tactics earlier in his career he mightve won a couple more against Rafa. Fortunately, I think he finally realizes what he must do, & injury or no injury for Rafa, I like how he rly went for his shots in this final. There are a lot of questions surrounding Rafas game, I think hell bounce back, but lady luck seems 2 be shining brightly on Roger right now hes my pick 2 win the US
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
Who's the #1 player? ;-)
Ryan81M 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rafael Nadal.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
No, go to the ATP website and have a look at the rankings :-)
You know, you really are an enigma. You claim to be a big Federer fan and then as soon as someone else becomes #1 for a little while, its "OMFG Rafa Nadal is the best I've ever seen, u r delusional hahaha"
And since when has Rafa been the No. 1 player for two years? August 18th, 2008- July 5th 2009. Do you make that 2 years because I make that less than 11 months.
Ryan81M 2 years ago 6
the swiss maestro
the king
the goat
MR....... FEDERER
seidl01 2 years ago 6
U obviously didnt get the sarcasm, I kno whos #1 in the rankings u idiot. Wen Ali came back from boxing after spending 2 yrs in prison from draftdodging everyone knew he was the best boxer, despite him not having the title. Rogers a legend & a great champion, but he hasnt been the best player in the world for just about 2 yrs now. And wat r u tlkin about 11 months, Rafa was better all of '08...last time I checked there r 12 months in a year lol. Delusional, please, ur a numbers guy, Im a realist
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
Clearly, you're unaware of how the ranking system works. Rafa has been #1 for 11 months. He became No. 1 in August of last year and lost his ranking in July of this year, so that means 11 months.
But ok, let's say that he was 'unofficially' the No. 1 since the clay season last year until the clay season this year. How does that make it 2 years? The last time I checked, Roger had won 3 slams in 2007 and the Masters Cup and had beaten Rafa 3 times in that year.
Ryan81M 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Haha don't belittle me, I understand the ranking system quite well. The fact that he didnt reach #1 until after Cincinnati makes no difference, tennis players & fans alike considered him the best player long before that, they even had interviews w many players who stated this. Maybe it hasnt been 2 yrs yet, but close to it. Let me ask you this, HAD Rafa Nadal played in the French & Wimbledon, who would have won...Had Muhammed Ali not gone to jail, who wouldve been the heavyweight champ?
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
On Clay Rafa is better. Maybe physically or psychically, maybe an awkward style for Federer - but he's been better.
As for Wimbledon - they've played 3 finals and Rafa won one - when Federer was struggling throughout the season and many other players beat him.
t0nk0n 2 years ago 4
Do you somehow feel better when you write "hahaha" on every other post? Just curious.....
Anyway, the question you asked is purely hypothetical and so has no place in such a discussion.
In the same way, you would have been convinced prior to Madrid that Rafa would have beaten Roger if they had met in the final. But life's unpredictable (as we see here) and there is no certainty that Rafa, nor Roger for that matter will definately win every slam they enter.
Ryan81M 2 years ago
"Haha" (just to aggravate u). Listen let's just call it quits after this..theres 3 certainties in life, death, taxes, & Rafa(healthy) winnig the French. Yes, life's unpredictable so your point is valid. HOWEVER, despite wat many pple may believe, Rog has pressure in the USO. Should he lose to Rafa in the final, that wud be the 4th consecutive loss in a major & wud surely reignite the GOAT debate. I hope Rog doesnt lose his hunger after the birth of his child & sets the record straight at the US.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
There is always pressure to an extent when you're defending a slam. However, Roger has nothing to prove to anyone in the USO. He has won 5 consecutive years, more than any other player in the open era. He is getting older and so to expect him to keep winning slam after slam after slam for the coming years is not necessarily realistic.
Whether he wins or not, he can hold is head up higher than anyone else and lay down the challenge: "Ok, I lost. Now let's see if any of you lot can do better"
Ryan81M 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Valid point but Idt its that cut & dry. Roger, albeit a great champion, didnt hav 2 beat Rafa for either of his 2 slams this year (which I thought wud hav been more fitting). If Rafa makes the final, I think there is a considerable amount of pressure resting on Feds shoulders. Hes the only GOAT candidate to nothave a winnig record against his nemesis.That in itself is enough to sway an argument. The very argument Navratilova emphasized..r u the GOAT wen u may be the 2nd best of your generation
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
Well, Roger only has a chance to face Rafa if Rafa reaches the finals or enters the tournament. If he gets knocked out in the 4th round and doesn't enter the second slam, that's not Roger's problem.
Ryan81M 2 years ago 10
Well considering Federer beat the guy who took out Nadal at the French open, I don't think anyone should be doubting his greatness.
HawtTuna 2 years ago 9
True that does give his French victory much legitimacy, but any tennis fan knows it's different when he plays Rafa
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
Who gives a shit if Roger's H2H record is shit against Nadal? You are compared to the fucking ATP not to one fucking player. Last time I fucking checked, it takes 7 wins over 7 different players to win a Grand Slam, not "beat Nadal 7 times." If Roger only loses to one man a few times in Grand Slams yet Nadal loses consistently to many players, who would you rather choose? Fact is Federer only has 10 losses since his first Wimbledon win while Nadal already has 10 losses since Roland Garros 05
THES0L0IST 2 years ago 9
Ya know, that's the best phrasing of this very cogent argument I've seen in a long while. Good stuff, soloist!
pantanegro 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
First of all, it doesnt matter how many times u curse in your comment, your argument is still flawed. It doesnt matter how many times your main rival beats you ass opposed to winnig against lesser opponents...sure it does! If Sampras lossed to Agassi more times than not, Petes' legacy wud be different. Same with Borg-Mcenroe, Laver-Rosewall...Roger is a great player, my favorite player, but when his legacy is compared to others, that will be the asterisk...the lopsided H2H against Rafa.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
tikealpzyx you act like your so righteous and right. Then why is it that nearly 99% of tennis players do not agree with your "arguments." I just told you, Nadal has already compiled 10 losses since his 2005 RG win (not including 2 withdraws), and Federer has 10 losses since his 2003 Wimby win. H2H MEANS NOTHING unless both players have nearly equal stats. If that was the case Richard Krijicek is a greater tennis player than Sampras. John McEnroe is equal to Borg. Borg is better than Laver.
AllGenreMusic 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What ever it is that you are saying, the facts remain. Rafael has beaten Fed on all surfaces. He has beaten him on 5 Grand Slams on all surfaces and even on Fed's territory Wimbledon. Roger has never beaten Rafa on a GS outside grass! Federer has lost most of their matches; Rafa holds a head 2 head over all players (Nalbandian one match to go)!! Rafael is the best. Even with injuries (twice this year) he has won 5 big titles (Roger 4) and Roger only won GS where Rafael was not there to stop him.
YoSoyZuri 2 years ago
I know you believe that's the way it works, but nobody else does. Sorry :(
AnimeIntroStyles4 2 years ago
and of course Roger hasn't beaten Rafa on a GS outside Grass. That's because Nadal never made it to the australian open final until 2009 (not Federers fault), Nadal didn't make it to the French Open final this year (Federer was there, where was Nadal?) and Nadal has NEVER made it to the US Open Final (again, not Federers fault).
AnimeIntroStyles4 2 years ago 5
HAHAH Good point Nadal is Federers Slave!
MetallicaManify 2 years ago 4
@MetallicaManify nadal is federer's slave? Thats why Federer is 2-6 in majors vs Nadal? That is why Nadal made federer cry infront on millions of people in Ao.
hhhhdmt 1 year ago
Yes, Federer cried because he lost to Nadal. But Federer's done that too. Nadal cried in the locker room at Wimbledon 2007 because he lost to Federer. Nadal also cried because he was so upset that he wouldn't ever be like Federer sometime in 2006. He admitted all of these times, so I'm not making this up
natbrain 1 year ago
Theres no way rafael could stop him this year. either in french of wimbledon.
andy316800 2 years ago 6
YoSoyZuri, we all know how great a player Nadal can be.
but the fact is,
fans like you give Nadal a bad name.
foul01 2 years ago 13
Well, that lopsided H2H doesn't tell the whole story, because most of their matches have been on Rafa's favorite surface, clay, which happens to be Fed's worst surface. But still, year after year he managed to get to the final of RG and other Masters on clay. And Rafa?? Do you honestly believe that H2H would look like that if they met more frequently on hard courts, or even US Open, which is, alongside grass, Fed's favorite surface???
strojzabelu 2 years ago 3
Probably not, I was just stating facts, but if you want to get into hypotheticals, yeah, Roger's a better- all-court player, so if they meet on other surfaces the H2H will probaly even out. I think Rafa might've been able to squeak some on the slow hardcourts of Australia, but as far as US and Wimbledon, I'd take Fed.
tikealpzyx 2 years ago
in ~3 yrs nadal and fed have met in 7 slam finals. none of the other GOAT candidates had rivals of that stature, and even then Nadal couldn't half match Federer's consistency. It's to Nadal's detriment obviously that he couldn't get to more hard court finals (especially before fed's "slump"), and that he lost in this yr's FO and federer didn't. I can't believe you're holding that against federer! you have issues. no one is doubting nadal's class here, but he's easily not better than federer.
demondayzzz 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
firedancerart 2 years ago
even though this is old and i know Roger won! ..it still makes me feel tense and nervous lol . I got used to seeing roger give away break points and falter at the finishing line. Roger has to combat his nerves ..thats whats affected his previous encounters with Nadal. He said it in his own words after winning Roland Garros .. "some games are almost unplayable" ..because he feels immensely nervous .
SidneyXda 2 years ago
I agree %100. I hope with the FO and his 14th out of the way, he can play a bit more at ease again. I've been going to great lengths to watch some of his older matches, because he just had more fun a few years ago. But it's been as though he's playing a different game, one that gives him no joy. Makes you wanna buy the man a beer or something!
nelsonguise 2 years ago
Yeah.. i hope so too, but there are so many jealous ex players who come up with new pressures for him. Ive notice whenever roger comes through some record or pressure..they dont feel happy about it and they come up with a new one instantly to put more pressure on him. Straight after he won FO, Mcenroe said now he has to beat Sampras's record at Wimbledon.. its like give the guy some breathing space! they think all this is easy for him, but he still feels the nerve of a first timer out there.
SidneyXda 2 years ago