Nadal wins 3 Masters and RG beating only two top10 players [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal wins 3 Masters and RG beating only two top10 players

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 06:01 PM
Shocking.

22 matches (5 in the Masters, 7 in RG) and only beats 2 top 10 players.

Fedmug in Madrid
Soderling in RG

Has this ever happened before? I mean someone getting 4 absolute joke match-ups in a row in some of the biggest tournaments in the tour.

Too bad Berdych didn't get to the final. I think we would have seen the only player in history to win a GS without facing a single top 10 player (if I am wrong please correct me...).

Is there still any doubt about the luckiest player on the tour? :)

Commander Data
06-06-2010, 06:04 PM
Not Rafas fault when the other top players lose early.

Sapeod
06-06-2010, 06:05 PM
Rafaella is extremely lucky, the luckiest player on the tour.

Montego
06-06-2010, 06:05 PM
Not his fault that the rest are mugs. Could have faced Verdasco or Djokovic, but they lost to Almagro and Melzer, so theoretically Almagro and Melzer were tougher oppsition to beat.

I guess that Nadal doesn't give a shit about this :wavey:

DuMa
06-06-2010, 06:06 PM
the luck favors the prepared

Priam
06-06-2010, 06:07 PM
What is the purpose of this thread??

M4RC
06-06-2010, 06:07 PM
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm167/djkazz505/HiHaterLogocopy.png

FrankyDubbles
06-06-2010, 06:08 PM
It's amazing how a clay court season sweep (not to mention NO SETS LOST AT ROLAND GARROS) can be spun into attributing his achievement to luck.

There was no luck. He was the best player on clay this season..... again.

DrJules
06-06-2010, 06:09 PM
Shocking.

22 matches (5 in the Masters, 7 in RG) and only beats 2 top 10 players.

Fedmug in Madrid
Soderling in RG

Has this ever happened before? I mean someone getting 4 absolute joke match-ups in a row in some of the biggest tournaments in the tour.

Too bad Berdych didn't get to the final. I think we would have seen the only player in history to win a GS without facing a single top 10 player (if I am wrong please correct me...).

Is there still any doubt about the luckiest player on the tour? :)


Factually true, but Federer, Djokovic and Murray, the other 3 members of the top 4, were not beating Nadal if they played him.

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 06:11 PM
Not his fault that the rest are mugs. Could have faced Verdasco or Djokovic, but they lost to Almagro and Melzer, so theoretically Almagro and Melzer were tougher oppsition to beat.

I guess that Nadal doesn't give a shit about this :wavey:
Yeah that's one side of it, but then some people said Schiavone wasn't a worthy winner of the female competition because it was Stosur who did all the dirty job on the way. Then Stosur folded like a cheap tent. It's different when you play the highest league dudes one after another and different if you play the low ranked ones only because they fluked against someone else a few days ago.

scarecrows
06-06-2010, 06:11 PM
good thread

Link Mage would have been proud of you :sad:

bizzle
06-06-2010, 06:12 PM
This seems to be lucky for the top 10 players who avoided Nadal this clay season rather than Nadal himself.

Chair Umpire
06-06-2010, 06:12 PM
Roland Garros 2009. Fed's rivals:

Soderling.
Delpo (5).
Monfils.
Haas.
Mathieu.
Acasuso.

Delpo was the only top10 he had to face to win the title.

Get it over, Fedtard. Deal with your bitterness in other way.

Sapeod
06-06-2010, 06:14 PM
Roland Garros 2009. Fed's rivals:

Soderling.
Delpo (5).
Monfils.
Haas.
Mathieu.
Acasuso.

Delpo was the only top10 he had to face to win the title.

Get it over, Fedtard. Deal with your bitterness in other way.
Oh please, Haas and Monfils were in extremely good form then, and Soderling had beaten Nadal.

Nadal has only had Soderling this year.

NadalSharapova
06-06-2010, 06:14 PM
the other top 10 players are lucky to avoid a mauling.

Montego
06-06-2010, 06:15 PM
Oh please, Haas and Monfils were in extremely good form then, and Soderling had beaten Nadal.

Nadal has only had Soderling this year.

what if he had Murray, Djokovic, Federer and Verdasco ?

You think he would lose ?

Ben.
06-06-2010, 06:15 PM
Still the two he did play, and beat in straight sets, were the two players who were the biggest threats to him.

superslam77
06-06-2010, 06:17 PM
Master Series reduced to 3 sets for a player.

has this ever happened before?

Would rafa sweep clay with 5 set matches?

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 06:18 PM
good thread

Link Mage would have been proud of you :sad:
Linky :sad: I wonder what he's doing these days... I've heard he's on Pablo's board but he couldn't fight any Rafatards over there...
Roland Garros 2009. Fed's rivals:

Soderling.
Delpo (5).
Monfils.
Haas.
Mathieu.
Acasuso.

Delpo was the only top10 he had to face to win the title.

Get it over, Fedtard. Deal with your bitterness in other way.
We talk about 3 Masters AND Roland Garros with only TWO top10 players on the way. There was a thread "Easiest route to GS win" but it was only about slams... Maybe someone (Voo? Sjengster?) can recall such an easy way to win Masters and a Slam together :shrug:

star
06-06-2010, 06:19 PM
Master Series reduced to 3 sets for a player.

has this ever happened before?

Would happen with 5 sets.

Look. The Masters Series have not been reduced to 3 sets for anyone. The only masters that consistently had a 5 set final was Rome (until this year). I posted a comprehensive breakdown of the five set final history, and some masters series have never had a 5 set final, and most only had them for a few years.

Jimnik
06-06-2010, 06:20 PM
So I guess this is a cautious congrats thread?

For me the rankings of his opponents are irrelevant. Top clay players are not necessarily ranked the highest.

Some traditionalists would still argue Barca is bigger than Madrid. But Rafa is definitely the first to make a clean sweep of the mandatory events. Not to mention winning Monte-Carlo 6 years in a row. Historic achievement.

superslam77
06-06-2010, 06:22 PM
Look. The Masters Series have not been reduced to 3 sets for anyone. The only masters that consistently had a 5 set final was Rome (until this year). I posted a comprehensive breakdown of the five set final history, and some masters series have never had a 5 set final, and most only had them for a few years.

still reduced...oh and they gave a bye to top players :o

3 master series on clay, none on grass...

easiest draw ever @ RG.

do you deny all this? fair handicap huh?

superslam77
06-06-2010, 06:23 PM
Hamburg changed to Madrid(home) on clay.

what a coincidence it happens when Master Series are reduced and modified.

acionescu
06-06-2010, 06:31 PM
What is the purpose of this thread??

trolling and practicing thinking in English :)

For my part, the moment I realised this, I erased two MS from my personal list with Rafa's achievement. Disgraceful :(

Sillyrabbit
06-06-2010, 06:31 PM
Yes, that evil Nadal, injuring Del Potro and Davydenko while also using his evil powers to ensure Murray and Djokovic lost some form. Very sneaky.

Chris Seahorse
06-06-2010, 06:34 PM
Yeah that's one side of it, but then some people said Schiavone wasn't a worthy winner of the female competition because it was Stosur who did all the dirty job on the way. Then Stosur folded like a cheap tent. It's different when you play the highest league dudes one after another and different if you play the low ranked ones only because they fluked against someone else a few days ago.

You are correct. They were indeed people who said Schiavone didn't deserve her title because all the toughest players were on the top half. And you know what? Those people were fools, idiots, trolls, not to be taken seriously. Just the same as those people who suggest Nadal didn't deserve his 5th RG title.

For goodness sake, he won 22 out of 22 matches and 51 out of 53 sets. What more could he do? Do you want to suggest someone who deserved to win RG more? Go ahead. Find anyone who has even the tiniest particle of a claim that they were the rightful winners of RG this year.

And it is not a about Nadal. It is simply about accepting results whatever they maybe and shutting up. If Soderling beat Nadal in the final he would have been a rightful and deserved winner. But he didn't. I don't like Berdych, but if Berdych were somehow able to beat Soderling and Nadal I would have had no problem acknowledging that he deserved to be RG champ. If you win a tournament you deserve the prize, doesn't matter who you beat on the way.

Priam
06-06-2010, 06:36 PM
Regardless of the opponent, the surface is still clay after all.

Aaric
06-06-2010, 06:36 PM
Itīs not his fault if other player sux on clay.
Who is gonna challenge him better than Ferrer or Soderling, Murray? :rolleyes:

Kiedis
06-06-2010, 06:38 PM
This is the first Grand Slam wich Rafa win without beating Federer directly. A new era, I suppose.

batavlada
06-06-2010, 06:40 PM
This thread is one of finest I saw at mtf.

Great statistical approach to demystifying of Rafael Nadal power.

Roamed
06-06-2010, 06:43 PM
Two is still better than zero :shrug:

M4RC
06-06-2010, 06:45 PM
supercrap77 you're making a fool of yourself. It's really embarrassing to read, actually.

njnetswill
06-06-2010, 06:45 PM
This thread is beyond stupid. Del Potro and Davydenko, a fifth of the top ten, did not even ENTER these events. And would beating top tenners like Roddick really make Nadal's success more valuable?

Chair Umpire
06-06-2010, 06:46 PM
Wimbledon 2009. Fed's rivals:

Yen-Hsun Lu
Guillermo Garcia-Lopez
Kohlschreiber
Soderling
Karkovic
Haas
Roddick (6)

No top 10 till' the final again.

Filo V.
06-06-2010, 06:49 PM
Who cares? He plays the opponents on the other side of the net, ranking is irrelevant. The top players aren't playing well, then that's their issue, not his. Doesn't in any way diminish his achievements, it proves HOW FAR AHEAD he is above all other players on clay.

luie
06-06-2010, 06:49 PM
Weak clay court era regardless of who he faced I'am afraid.

Bilbo
06-06-2010, 06:51 PM
Too bad Berdych didn't get to the final. I think we would have seen the only player in history to win a GS without facing a single top 10 player (if I am wrong please correct me...).

Berdych won't win a slam in his career. not good enough. i don't care if rafa only beat two top10 players. what i've seen today shows me that he's the best player in the world at the moment and he would beat anyone.

Is there still any doubt about the luckiest player on the tour? :)

Federer FO 2009

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 06:51 PM
Like I have said earlier and sadly have to repeat again since some posters struggle to read, a thread about the easiest way to the GS title has already been created and discussed. Use search tool.

But has there ever been an example of winning 3 (!!!) masters and a GS having to face just two top 10 players?

Davydenko and Del Potro don't fulfill the entire top ten. Always somebody has to be injured, it's extremely rare if the whole top ten enters a tournament.

Sillyrabbit
06-06-2010, 06:51 PM
This thread is beyond stupid. Del Potro and Davydenko, a fifth of the top ten, did not even ENTER these events. And would beating top tenners like Roddick really make Nadal's success more valuable?

Yes there's some almost invisible rule about extra 500pts for beating top 10 players in a tourney on the ATP website, it's really tiny and you have to squint really, really hard and bend your head sideways to read it.

Bilbo
06-06-2010, 06:58 PM
But has there ever been an example of winning 3 (!!!) masters and a GS having to face just two top 10 players?

federer won the FO and Wimbledon last year and only faced two top10 players. he struggled to win both though. nadal on the other side only lose 2 sets overall. different league there.

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 06:59 PM
Yeah that's one side of it, but then some people said Schiavone wasn't a worthy winner of the female competition because it was Stosur who did all the dirty job on the way. Then Stosur folded like a cheap tent. It's different when you play the highest league dudes one after another and different if you play the low ranked ones only because they fluked against someone else a few days ago.

I also posted this and people keep only their full of rage answers that rankings don't play :confused:

Because, if you ask me, I loved the way Canas won Toronto Masters one day. He mashed Federer (10) Srichaphan (60), Kafelnikov (5), Safin (2), Haas (3), Roddick (12) :worship: This is something which deserves the top respect :eek: Anybody disagrees?

Mlad
06-06-2010, 06:59 PM
Verdasco in MC

andylovesaustin
06-06-2010, 07:05 PM
As I have been reminded time and time again, clay is not Andy Roddick's best surface. :rolleyes:

That ain't Rafa's problem.

Roger lost to Sodapop, but Roger still made it to the quarters if not the semis, ending a huge semi streak, so I'll cut Roger some slack. Nobody doubts Roger's success in grand slams.

The others like Andy Murray.. well..they apparently don't compete well in grand slams.:shrug:

That ain't Rafa's problem either.

John McEnroe alluded to this today, actually.

njnetswill
06-06-2010, 07:05 PM
No matter what the circumstance, top ten player does not equal hardest opposition. It's a silly criteria to use to judge "hard opponents" vs "easy opponents", since being in the top ten does not mean much and players outside the top ten can be much more dangerous than out of form top ten players. Almost a third of the current top 100 has been top ten at some point in their career.

Let's take Nadal and clay. Would beating Roddick make his road to these titles more respect worthy?

What about if Federer beat Massu at Wimbledon when Massu was top ten? Does that add any prestige to a title run? I think not.

SheepleBuster
06-06-2010, 07:07 PM
Shocking.

22 matches (5 in the Masters, 7 in RG) and only beats 2 top 10 players.

Fedmug in Madrid
Soderling in RG

Has this ever happened before? I mean someone getting 4 absolute joke match-ups in a row in some of the biggest tournaments in the tour.

Too bad Berdych didn't get to the final. I think we would have seen the only player in history to win a GS without facing a single top 10 player (if I am wrong please correct me...).

Is there still any doubt about the luckiest player on the tour? :)


Don't even get me started on this. I am going to have a heart attack. Adam Helfant, we will run you out. This guy is a cancer for our sport

Johnny Groove
06-06-2010, 07:07 PM
Nathii just being the little shit-stirrer she is :p

Pirata.
06-06-2010, 07:07 PM
Verdasco in MC

He was ranked 11th when they met in MC.

andylovesaustin
06-06-2010, 07:10 PM
I mean.. you know..

Rafa is taking care of business.

Roger has been taking care of business for years.

It's the rest of the top ten players not taking care of their business.

Soo.. it really doesn't matter if Sodapop isn't a top ten player: he made it to the French final two years in a row. So he's doing pretty well at that particular tournament if not as successful overall.

peribsen
06-06-2010, 07:17 PM
Shocking.

22 matches (5 in the Masters, 7 in RG) and only beats 2 top 10 players.

Fedmug in Madrid
Soderling in RG

Has this ever happened before? I mean someone getting 4 absolute joke match-ups in a row in some of the biggest tournaments in the tour.

Too bad Berdych didn't get to the final. I think we would have seen the only player in history to win a GS without facing a single top 10 player (if I am wrong please correct me...).

Is there still any doubt about the luckiest player on the tour? :)


- Why do people keep forgetting Verdasco is a top 10? That makes it 3 he beat. Considering Rafa himself is a top10, that leaves us with 6 other candidates.

- Of them, at least two (Roddick, Tsonga) are jokes on clay (Tsonga canīt even beat Rafa on hard, his win in AO-08 was even more hyped than Soderling's victory in RG last year). That leaves 4.

- Murray? beating Rafa on clay? Never happened and I think it will remain so for a long time, this guy is turkey to players who later get roasted by Nadal).

- Djokovic? Again never could beat Rafa on clay in his best period, and today he falls to the likes of Melzer. Nough said.

- Davydenko? Davy is very much a threat to Rafa everywhere BUT clay.

- Delpo? has he really achieved much on clay? + the jury is still out on his 'dominance' over Nadal (last year he won 3 times, but 2 of them were close and were, respectively, the end of a streak of wins by Rafa on hard that had to happen someday -Miami, Rafa came from storming AO and IW-, and Canada - Nadal`s first tournament after injury, expected fall-. The only thrashing came on USO, where Delpo was on fire, the surface is Nadal's worse and it happened during Rafa's worst year ever). Delpo does have the weapons needed to trouble Nadal, he may indeed prove himself superior someday, but I need more solid evidence before I clinch that one.

So it really boils down to the unfortunate fact that Delpo, the only likely candidate, is injured, so we'll have to wait another year to see how they matchup on clay.

From all of this you conclude that the tour is bursting with players capable of scolding Rafa on clay. But in fact I have just showed you it is all BS.

Nathaliia
06-06-2010, 07:23 PM
Verdasco was #12 at the moment of match. Check ATP sheet please. And we are still waiting for the answer of the statisticians. I mean, how seriously can we treat the lenghty answers of people who think 12 is top 10??? To me it looks suspicious.

Greetings :wavey:

spriwi
06-06-2010, 07:23 PM
- Why do people keep forgetting Verdasco is a top 10? That makes it 3 he beat. Considering Rafa himself is a top10, that leaves us with 6 other candidates.

- Of them, at least two (Roddick, Tsonga) are jokes on clay (Tsonga canīt even beat Rafa on hard, his win in AO-08 was even more hyped than Soderling's victory in RG last year). That leaves 4.

- Murray? beating Rafa on clay? Never happened and I think it will remain so for a long time, this guy is turkey to players who later get roasted by Nadal).

- Djokovic? Again never could beat Rafa on clay in his best period, and today he falls to the likes of Melzer. Nough said.

- Davydenko? Davy is very much a threat to Rafa everywhere BUT clay.

- Delpo? has he really achieved much on clay? + the jury is still out on his 'dominance' over Nadal (last year he won 3 times, but 2 of them were close and were, respectively, the end of a streak of wins by Rafa on hard that had to happen someday -Miami, Rafa came from storming AO and IW-, and Canada - Nadal`s first tournament after injury, expected fall-. The only thrashing came on USO, where Delpo was on fire, the surface is Nadal's worse and it happened during Rafa's worst year ever). Delpo does have the weapons needed to trouble Nadal, he may indeed prove himself superior someday, but I need more solid evidence before I clinch that one.

So it really boils down to the unfortunate fact that Delpo, the only likely candidate, is injured, so we'll have to wait another year to see how they matchup on clay.

From all of this you conclude that the tour is bursting with players capable of scolding Rafa on clay. But in fact I have just showed you it is all BS.

this.

Swiss Mountain
06-06-2010, 07:24 PM
There is no Kuerten to rafa, that is why Rafa is a bit lucky but he is very tough on this surface
Congrats to him anyway, I though he was never going to win a slam again.

l_mac
06-06-2010, 07:25 PM
TROLL THREAD!

:lol:

Come on people.

andylovesaustin
06-06-2010, 07:31 PM
There is no Kuerten to rafa, that is why Rafa is a bit lucky but he is very tough on this surface
Congrats to him anyway, I though he was never going to win a slam again.

Guga...well I adore him.

But after watching Rafa today, I'm not sure Guga would win in their matchup.

It would definitely be interesting. But it's just Rafa moves so well.

It's difficult to say..

Tom_Bombadil
06-06-2010, 07:31 PM
I don't agree with the poster. I think Rafa deserves some respect for what he's achieved. It's not his fault that Melzer played better than Djokovic, or Soderling than Federer.

And BTW, he won all in dirt this season, he was the best by far.

Jomp1
06-06-2010, 07:35 PM
Top10 in the rankings is not top10 on clay. Federer, Sod, Nadal, Djokovic, Verdasco are the ones that I'd include in clay top10. Nadal vs Roddick or likewise on clay would be like stealing candy from a child. It's an interesting fact but it wouldn't matter for Rafa, he'd still win. If Djokovic lose to Melzer how on earth would he have beaten Rafa?

extremaduratenis
06-06-2010, 07:42 PM
Rafaella is extremely lucky, the luckiest player on the tour.
Winning 7 Grand Slam is just "luck"..... So Murray must be very very unlucky...