different thoughts about rome's final

hey
i just got sick of reading all these threads made by nadal fans about nadal is better than federer, or federer fan excuses for fed's loss, so i decided to write my own opinion which may hurt some people(nadal fans) but i think it's true.
we all know nadal's best surface is clay and i think after sunday's final , he may and i think he will set a new record for most straight wins on clay, but i really think nadal should be worried instead of happy. Federer, playing in clay, was just 2 forehands from beating him in his best surface, where supposedly nadal should dominate him. Many people may say nadal was not playing his best tennis, but fed wasnt either. If you have seen fed play in the middle and end of 2004 and the beggining of 2005, you know he can play better than this. I think what was clear is that fed has got what it takes to beat nadal on clay and i have a feeling that if they mett in roland garros' fianl it would be fed the one who will walk out with the win. If you think it carefully, and we make the comparison of each one's best surface:
- nadal doesnt have a chance of beating fed in grass
- fed has made it clear with sunday's game that he CAN beat nadal in clay
So i'm pretty sure that next year's clay season will be different
your thoughts??

hey
i just got sick of reading all these threads made by nadal fans about nadal is better than federer, or federer fan excuses for fed's loss, so i decided to write my own opinion which may hurt some people(nadal fans) but i think it's true.
we all know nadal's best surface is clay and i think after sunday's final , he may and i think he will set a new record for most straight wins on clay, but i really think nadal should be worried instead of happy. Federer, playing in clay, was just 2 forehands from beating him in his best surface, where supposedly nadal should dominate him. Many people may say nadal was not playing his best tennis, but fed wasnt either. If you have seen fed play in the middle and end of 2004 and the beggining of 2005, you know he can play better than this. I think what was clear is that fed has got what it takes to beat nadal on clay and i have a feeling that if they mett in roland garros' fianl it would be fed the one who will walk out with the win. If you think it carefully, and we make the comparison of each one's best surface:
- nadal doesnt have a chance of beating fed in grass
- fed has made it clear with sunday's game that he CAN beat nadal in clay
So i'm pretty sure that next year's clay season will be different
your thoughts??

Click to expand...

I agree it puts some concerns on Nadal's mind.
But I think it's still a close call if they meet again on FO final.

The thing is that it's very hard to beat a player 3-4 straight times
especially a caliber of federer.

You have to hide real stuff until critical moment. If I were Nadal,
I would have tanked Rome final letting federer win.
And show real stuff in french Open. But the vilas record was
on the line, unfortunately.

Sampras used to do that well. He did not use some of his shots
until he faces real critical moments. He did not let palyers get used
to some of his shots keeping every body confused "where the hell
this come from?" in critical monents in gland slams. He would tank some
non-gland slam tournaments.

Federer now done with all the homework. I think he maximized
his chances against Nadal on clay. But you know it's still a close
call. Nadal surely has some real stuff that neutralizes Federer's
power but it would be interesting to see how Nadal handles this
enormous pressure Federer is putting systematically over last
month or two ...

hey
i just got sick of reading all these threads made by nadal fans about nadal is better than federer, or federer fan excuses for fed's loss, so i decided to write my own opinion which may hurt some people(nadal fans) but i think it's true.
we all know nadal's best surface is clay and i think after sunday's final , he may and i think he will set a new record for most straight wins on clay, but i really think nadal should be worried instead of happy. Federer, playing in clay, was just 2 forehands from beating him in his best surface, where supposedly nadal should dominate him. Many people may say nadal was not playing his best tennis, but fed wasnt either. If you have seen fed play in the middle and end of 2004 and the beggining of 2005, you know he can play better than this. I think what was clear is that fed has got what it takes to beat nadal on clay and i have a feeling that if they mett in roland garros' fianl it would be fed the one who will walk out with the win. If you think it carefully, and we make the comparison of each one's best surface:
- nadal doesnt have a chance of beating fed in grass
- fed has made it clear with sunday's game that he CAN beat nadal in clay
So i'm pretty sure that next year's clay season will be different
your thoughts??

Click to expand...

Shoulda woulda coulda.....if Federer made it clear that he CAN beat Nadal on clay Sunday, wouldn't that only be confirmed if Federer actually BEAT Nadal on Sunday....Yes, he is closer and closer supposedly everytime, but even after the Monte Carlo final, everyone was like, Federer proved he can beat Nadal on clay, it was so close to going to a 5th set, blah blah blah. If Federer can beat Nadal on clay, then he should do it and stop *****footing around...I'm sick of reading this crap.

Shoulda woulda coulda.....if Federer made it clear that he CAN beat Nadal on clay Sunday, wouldn't that only be confirmed if Federer actually BEAT Nadal on Sunday....

Click to expand...

Anyone can beat anyone on any given day. Federer came closer to beating Nadal on clay than anyone else in the last few years. Of course he CAN beat Nadal, he can beat anyone. And you do realize that all he had to do to win the match was make one shot, don't you? You can say "5-1, wow, Nadal dominates Federer," or you can be a little smarter and watch and enjoy the match.

It was said that Roma has the fastest clay courts so that would be more in Federers favour(as far as clay is concerned). It was also said that Monte Carlo was the slowest so that should favour Nadal more yet Federer didn't lose all that badly there either. So it's pretty close anyhow.

Roland Garros is supposedly the 2nd fastest however, there are many, many other factors to take into account so whomever wins wouldn't surprise me either way. Only thing I wish for is that it's competitive and goes to 13-11 in the 5th set. Wooo!

The clay at Rome and the french open is not going to be all that different. Rome was a pretty good indication of what cold happend at the French Open. Federer has a good chance to win it! It's going to be exciting!

Federer appears poised, now, to overtake the guy who is clay's most dominant force, on his own turf.

But even if he doesn't, so what?

The fact that one guy can be the world's best on every surface but one -- clay, which plays so much differently than the others that it's practically a whole 'nother sport -- and can be second best on that surface, is mind-boggling.

That Fed is now neck and neck for the title "best clay courter alive," just goes to show how thoroughly he's *****-slapping Nadal at the sport of tennis as a whole.

Federer appears poised, now, to overtake the guy who is clay's most dominant force, on his own turf.

But even if he doesn't, so what?

The fact that one guy can be the world's best on every surface but one -- clay, which plays so much differently than the others that it's practically a whole 'nother sport -- and can be second best on that surface, is mind-boggling.

That Fed is now neck and neck for the title "best clay courter alive," just goes to show how thoroughly he's *****-slapping Nadal at the sport of tennis as a whole.

Click to expand...

You realize that you've posted this exact post (or a variation of it) in every single Nadal-Federer thread for the past month or so?

We get it, Nadal sucks(& is possibly on roids), Federer rules. And that you are unbiased to either player.

The fact that one guy can be the world's best on every surface but one -- clay, which plays so much differently than the others that it's practically a whole 'nother sport -- and can be second best on that surface, is mind-boggling.

That Fed is now neck and neck for the title "best clay courter alive," just goes to show how thoroughly he's *****-slapping Nadal at the sport of tennis as a whole.

Click to expand...

Well I like nadal too, didn't need to throw in the *****slapping. :mrgreen: But amen people need to get the big picture that is federer. The dude's like a 7 foot tall center almost out-maneuvering a stellar point guard. The ball was just sitting laying on the rim, camera flashes going off, then last second falling out, like a golf ball quivering on the edge for 2 seconds and deciding not to fall.

I would have to agree with the fact that instead of calling Federer "incompetent, worse than Nadal, or becoming mentally fragile," we should all be amazed by the fact that he has in this year won a grand slam, 2 hard court masters, and made the finals on two clay court masters.

No one can say the same about Nadal (ya he didn't get to play the Aus, I know), who is still essentially a one surface wonder (although his hardcourt game is easily top 5).

Ya I know that Nadal beat Fed 2 out of 3 times on hard, and the third was so close it's ridiculous, but Fed has established him as the second best clay courter in the world under the radar, and no one acknowledges that.

I really don't understand how Nadal will be #1 in the world soon if he has to win every clay tourner (cause Fed will always be on his tail in those), and then find a way to make every hard court final to keep up with Fed (who wins every hard tourney he plays), and somehow make up for the Wimbledon defecit.......

And denying the fact that Fed almost beat Nadal on clay like he did, claiming it wasn't close or that he can't beat anyone on a given day, blah blah, is bs. He SHOULD HAVE beaten Nadal on an even day on Nadal's favorite surface, and he's almost done it twice this year already.

Federer should have won the match, the audience thought he had the match won and gave him a congratulatory applause, he ended up losing, let's leave it at that. Overanalyzing never did any good for anyone. Did he choke? Yes. Is he a choker? No.

I would have to agree with the fact that instead of calling Federer "incompetent, worse than Nadal, or becoming mentally fragile," we should all be amazed by the fact that he has in this year won a grand slam, 2 hard court masters, and made the finals on two clay court masters.

No one can say the same about Nadal (ya he didn't get to play the Aus, I know), who is still essentially a one surface wonder (although his hardcourt game is easily top 5).

Ya I know that Nadal beat Fed 2 out of 3 times on hard, and the third was so close it's ridiculous, but Fed has established him as the second best clay courter in the world under the radar, and no one acknowledges that.

I really don't understand how Nadal will be #1 in the world soon if he has to win every clay tourner (cause Fed will always be on his tail in those), and then find a way to make every hard court final to keep up with Fed (who wins every hard tourney he plays), and somehow make up for the Wimbledon defecit.......

And denying the fact that Fed almost beat Nadal on clay like he did, claiming it wasn't close or that he can't beat anyone on a given day, blah blah, is bs. He SHOULD HAVE beaten Nadal on an even day on Nadal's favorite surface, and he's almost done it twice this year already.

And Grimjack, I love you post, seriously.

Click to expand...

Everything you said is extremely biased. You are obviously a hard core Fed fan and hate Nadal. Remember that Nadal is still only 19 years old and has beaten Federer 4 times in a row when Federer is at his prime. I agree at the end of this year he won't be ranked number one but in two or three years Nadal will be at his prime and he will definitely by ranked number one then. Let's just sit back and enjoy this historic moment in tennis history when perhaps two of the greatest tennis players have collided for an amazing rivarly.

This is always the excuse from federer fans when he loses: he didnt play his best......i hate that excuse any1 agree? everytime he loses v nadal its that excuse. your not going to play your best if ur up againsst nadal on clay

Everything you said is extremely biased. You are obviously a hard core Fed fan and hate Nadal. Remember that Nadal is still only 19 years old and has beaten Federer 4 times in a row when Federer is at his prime. I agree at the end of this year he won't be ranked number one but in two or three years Nadal will be at his prime and he will definitely by ranked number one then. Let's just sit back and enjoy this historic moment in tennis history when perhaps two of the greatest tennis players have collided for an amazing rivarly.

Click to expand...

I don't think Nadal is going to end up as one of the best tennis players in history at least not in the way Federer, Sampras, and Laver, and Mccenroe are going to be. Federer could become the greatest of all time, Nadal could became the greatest clay court player of all time, but he won't reach the level of a Federer or Sampras or Borg in all honesty!

Nadal will never be considered one of the greatest. The true test of dimensionality is how a player would do with a wooden racquet. Federer has an all-court game so he could probably figure out a way with a wooden racquet, Agassi would be like Borg with a wooden racquet, Sampras pretty much played with a wooden board...and then look at Nadal. He'd be absolutely useless without his trusty Babolat. I think he'll go down as one of the best claycourters ever, but definitely will never crack the GOAT list. Unless he starts winning Slams other than the French.

Not to hijack this thread but - I was watching the match again last night and at one point (I think towards the end of the match) Nadal applied stencil ink to the strings before heading out on court to hit with the racquet. Why would he do that? Does he have some kind of contract/clause w/ Babolat that their logo will always be on the strings? Is hit a ritual for him or something?

Nadal will never be considered one of the greatest?We already know that even though he is only 19+just getting started?Sounds like somebody should be playing the market,if they can predict the future like that.

I had no idea that you judge how good a player is by how good they would play with a wooden racquet.And without seeing them play with one you know who could+who couldnt.Were do you come up with this BS.

Weak excuses are one thing but some of this **** is unreal,like someone stated woulda coulda shoulda!