Why are Nadals opponents always fired up and Federers aren't??? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why are Nadals opponents always fired up and Federers aren't???

supersexynadal
09-06-2006, 10:55 PM
Someone just asked this question and its a good one!!i am smiling....

So miki against nadal. He looks at the other side of the net and thinks, hey!little spanish teen, im russian, im bigger, im better I'll try to beat him..

Anyone besides nadal vs federer-what the hell r they thinking??!!! Take a set and stop choking, hes human and hes NOT playing exeptional tennis at the moment :smash:

scoobs
09-06-2006, 10:57 PM
They think they have a shot against Nadal on hardcourts because, Montreal last year aside, Rafa's success on North American hardcourts at this time of year has been a bit limited.

So they're up for the fight a bit more.

Skyward
09-06-2006, 10:59 PM
So miki against nadal. He looks at the other side of the net and thinks, hey!little spanish teen, im russian, im bigger, im better I'll try to beat him..



In what department is he bigger? :D

:retard:

DrJules
09-06-2006, 11:00 PM
Nadal has had to play better players this tournament.

supersexynadal
09-06-2006, 11:07 PM
In what department is he bigger? :D

:retard:

Filthy arse!!

well they still do that against federer on CLAY.
Still, when federers not playing his best they still go on court hoping his leg would break

Deboogle!.
09-06-2006, 11:10 PM
I'm sure James will be plenty fired up tomorrow (night) :)

scoobs
09-06-2006, 11:15 PM
I'm sure James will be plenty fired up tomorrow (night) :)

Until he starts feeling it again in Federer's House of Pain :devil:

supersexynadal
09-06-2006, 11:17 PM
I'm sure James will be plenty fired up tomorrow (night)

mmm....aha.....yea ok, and repeat what he did in the IW final....Yea id love to see that again!!! Bring it on james, TRY not to choke or i'll do it for u!

DDrago2
09-06-2006, 11:40 PM
supersexynadal, it's not the case of his oponents not wanting to beat him, but Federer being a better player than Nadal

Rogiman
09-06-2006, 11:44 PM
supersexynadal, it's not the case of his oponents not wanting to beat him, but Federer being a better player than Nadal
Word. and Nadal's alleged 'improvement' this year at the Open is nothing but an illusion, he would have lost in the 3rd round again had he drawn the same opponent.

Beforehand
09-07-2006, 12:20 AM
Yes, this seems obvious, and might come off as Nadal bashing or whatever, but the truth is, Nadal is way more susceptible to upsets, barring clay. I mean, you have a player like Luis Horna or Youzhny who plays well and just takes all the wind out of Nadal's sails, and even the way Youzhny played today, you still get the feeling he'd be hard pressed to defeat Federer.

Nadal just isn't as daunting a task on non-clay surfaces.

Deboogle!.
09-07-2006, 12:24 AM
Until he starts feeling it again in Federer's House of Pain :devil:I don't believe that was the question lol. The question was why do Rafa's opponents come out fired up and not Roger's. James is not gonna back down emotionally I don't think, he'll probably lose but not b/c he's not fiery enough :shrug:

scoobs
09-07-2006, 12:26 AM
I don't believe that was the question lol. The question was why do Rafa's opponents come out fired up and not Roger's. James is not gonna back down emotionally I don't think, he'll probably lose but not b/c he's not fiery enough :shrug:
Well he was for the first set in Indian Wells then seemed to lose the fire fairly rapidly.

I actually hope he does a better job this time round.

Neely
09-07-2006, 12:28 AM
They think they have a shot against Nadal on hardcourts because, Montreal last year aside, Rafa's success on North American hardcourts at this time of year has been a bit limited.

So they're up for the fight a bit more.
Yes, I also think that's true. And I believe that Nadal is giving his opponents more surface for attack or aggression than Federer because in Nadal's game there is more aggression and I think some opponents take power from his actions when he is having a fistpump or sending over an angry look.

Word. and Nadal's alleged 'improvement' this year at the Open is nothing but an illusion, he would have lost in the 3rd round again had he drawn the same opponent.
you say it, he 'would'
actually he didn't and it is an improvement
and had player XY drawn player AB at tournament CD he would have lost too

I think last year Nadal was just way too flat and physically not at all up to the task; he didn't play really well this year yet, but better than last year and yes, it's my subjective view on it.

NYCtennisfan
09-07-2006, 01:00 AM
Players know now that they have a hitter's chance if they are hitting big and cleanly. It has been done time and time again and they go out onto the court knowing they have a chance. What exactly works against Federer? There is no one thing that you can point to in all of his losses really.

scoobs
09-07-2006, 01:02 AM
Yep - the players have got the message loud and clear from Blake and Berdych last year and this - hard, flat, deep and aggressive and you can punch holes in the defense. Now the ones who can bring that style of play are getting success with it - Rafa needs to adapt.

Adler
09-07-2006, 01:02 AM
Jesus... truly, Rafa has a lot of devoted fans. Even rogerfederer.com forum isn't so devoted

marcRD
09-07-2006, 01:03 AM
It is beacause Nadal doesnt blow you out of the court, he just give you balls to work with and hopes you are not on fire this day. If you are on fire and is talented then it is bye bye to Nadal. Federer is just much, much greater on hardcourt than Nadal, there are light years between them on fast courts.

princediablo
09-07-2006, 01:04 AM
Well, his last 3 US Open Series tournaments have sure shown that he's way more beatable than Federer.

Yoda
09-07-2006, 01:04 AM
Someone just asked this question and its a good one!!i am smiling....

So miki against nadal. He looks at the other side of the net and thinks, hey!little spanish teen, im russian, im bigger, im better I'll try to beat him..

Anyone besides nadal vs federer-what the hell r they thinking??!!! Take a set and stop choking, hes human and hes NOT playing exeptional tennis at the moment :smash:

:silly:

forbiddenfruit
09-07-2006, 01:06 AM
It is really irritating .. i know. All sorts of silly errors, sometimes they look like they are actually shaking. It's federer's AURA. People walk on court knowing this is the best player, who has been hyped (deservedly) as almost invincible. They're so scared, they just hope they don't get bagelled.

Where as Nadal, in the eyes of some hasn't really proven himself on other surfaces than clay. I personally think his game can win on all surfaces... but he is still building an Aura on there, plus ... Nadal is 20 - most of his opponents see him as a kid, and don't want to lose to a kid (whose game has been called one-dimensional).

But it's no-ones fault but these opponents. If they don't want to show balls ...

scoobs
09-07-2006, 01:07 AM
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.

missbungle
09-07-2006, 01:10 AM
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.

:yeah:

jasmin
09-07-2006, 01:12 AM
Nadal improved but I think other opponents don't see Nadal in the same light as Federer. I read enough comments from other players to get that feeling. Now on clay they will fear Nadal like they do Fed on all surfaces.

LCeh
09-07-2006, 01:12 AM
Maybe because they feel that Nadal is more beatable than Federer?

They have very different games, Roger is usually more aggressive while Rafa is more consistent. To beat Rafa you have to play consistently well, but he is going to give you chances if you can make your shots, with Roger, he might make shots before you get the chance to attack. It's a different feeling because with Rafa, at least you know that you will have some type of control of the outcome of the match, while if Roger plays well, there is not much you can do.

marcRD
09-07-2006, 01:17 AM
Maybe because they feel that Nadal is more beatable than Federer?

They have very different games, Roger is usually more aggressive while Rafa is more consistent. To beat Rafa you have to play consistently well, but he is going to give you chances if you can make your shots, with Roger, he might make shots before you get the chance to attack. It's a different feeling because with Rafa, at least you know that you will have some type of control of the outcome of the match, while if Roger plays well, there is not much you can do.

EXACTLY.

forbiddenfruit
09-07-2006, 01:27 AM
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.

Totally agree, but it's easier said than done.

mallorn
09-07-2006, 01:27 AM
Maybe because they feel that Nadal is more beatable than Federer?
They should view Federer as a bigger challenge and be even more motivated. ;)
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.
:)

scoobs
09-07-2006, 01:30 AM
Totally agree, but it's easier said than done.
Perhaps not easy, but this is a sport not an admiration society - a healthy lack of respect for your opponent before the match is a good thing.

LCeh
09-07-2006, 01:34 AM
They should view Federer as a bigger challenge and be even more motivated. ;)

Ideally, that's definitely true. But then, I think most of the players that have a losing attitude on courts are the ones that Roger has beaten on numerous occasions. It's difficult to be fired up when you have been beaten several times knowing that you tried your best.

Sunset of Age
09-07-2006, 01:36 AM
Don't forget the fact that Youzhny indeed played an outstanding match...

prima donna
09-07-2006, 01:40 AM
Roger has been dominating tennis for years, he's beaten everyone. Nadal hasn't, it's called putting in the time and the work. Seniority. I can't understand for the life of me the reason that the majority of Nadal fans can't understand this.

Roger Federer has plan A, B and C.
Roger Federer has 8 GS titles.
Roger Federer has less than 20 losses over a 3 year plus period.
Roger Federer has destroyed player after player.

What has Nadal done besides dominating on clay ? Anyone that can't understand the fact that it's not a matter of Roger being feared, but going into ninja mode and hitting 44 fucking winners and making 12 UFE's ( 2005 Wimbledon Final against Roddick ).

What ignorance. Nadal is strategically inferior to Federer, that would be your explanation.

marcRD
09-07-2006, 01:43 AM
Roger Federer has plan A, B and C.


Yeah, that is another point which had to be made. Federer has much more options depending on the player he is playing, Nadal is kind of one dimensional (not taking away that he is great in that one dimension he dominates).

Jagermeister
09-07-2006, 01:49 AM
Nadal hasn't proven himself to be as indestructible on hardcourt as he is on clay. Simple as that. Didn't see too many people fired up against him at RG. And after the crappy summer HC results he had, I'm sure that gave them even more confidence.

Federer has been so dominant, he just walks into matches with so much confidence. It's not a coincidence that most of the losses he's had have been against younger players who *might* not be as intimidated. (Berdych, Murray, and of course Nadal).

mallorn
09-07-2006, 01:57 AM
Ideally, that's definitely true. But then, I think most of the players that have a losing attitude on courts are the ones that Roger has beaten on numerous occasions. It's difficult to be fired up when you have been beaten several times knowing that you tried your best.
They're in a vicious circle - they have a losing attitude because they can't win and they can't win because they have a losing attitude. The only way out is to change the attitude. I know, easier said than done.

rofe
09-07-2006, 02:18 AM
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.

I disagree with your statement because you make a sweeping generalization. Need I remind you that Fed was given a very stern test at Toronto where players did not choke against him and he lost in Cincy.

Now, to answer the thread starter's question; there could be many reasons:

1) Nadal is young so losing to a younger guy can be humiliating
2) Nadal is simply not good enough yet on fast HC.
3) His recent results have lead players to believe that he is vulnerable on fast HC.

Fedex
09-07-2006, 02:19 AM
I'm sure James will be plenty fired up tomorrow (night) :)
Until something doesn't go his way. That's his only chance of winning tomorrow, to play a perfect match. Once something doesn't go just right, Blake will crumble and roll over for Federer.
We'll have to wait and see though. It should be an interesting match.

mickymouse
09-07-2006, 03:30 AM
Not bashing Nadal but it's simply because they believe they can beat Nadal but don't believe they can beat Federer. Federer commands more respect from the players. Also.....the fist pumps from Nadal could have irritated them and fired them up, no?

selesfan
09-07-2006, 03:32 AM
Nadal has had to play better players this tournament.

You have got to be kidding, he had an easy draw. :rolleyes:

Pfloyd
09-07-2006, 03:58 AM
Nadal's play style also catches up to his opponents, in other words, Rafa's celberations may also cuse his opponents to feel pumped up too, like a real boxing match. This game is also about having a good time and showing your fighting spirit, and Nadal does just that, he brings the best out of the crowd, out of himself, and SOMETIMES out of his opponents too.

GlennMirnyi
09-07-2006, 04:00 AM
What do you expect? That players like the absurd behaviour of the moonballer on-court?
It's a matter of "respect and be respected". I'm sure players would want to kill him if he didn't do that stupid jumping, provoking and 30 minutes break to serve on every point.

scoobs
09-07-2006, 04:02 AM
I disagree with your statement because you make a sweeping generalization. Need I remind you that Fed was given a very stern test at Toronto where players did not choke against him and he lost in Cincy.


Given this thread is based on a sweeping generalisation I don't see the problem?

Yes Roger was pushed in Toronto and lost in Cincy but these are fairly rare occasions and a lot of Toronto was down to his own loose play when serving out sets or in tiebreaks. His opponents did well to capitalise but wilted in the third.

GlennMirnyi
09-07-2006, 04:03 AM
2) Nadal is simply not good enough yet on fast HC.
3) His recent results have lead players to believe that he is vulnerable on fast HC.

He will never be good enough.

He IS vulnerable on fast HC. What more people want to accept that? Lost to Moya on a 1st round and a semi-average Ferrero. Punished by Clement, Berdych and Youzhny.

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 10:48 AM
They should show the same balls for Federer - less respect, more competition.
HAHAHA! :lol: true i guess :rolleyes:



He will never be good enough.
He IS vulnerable on fast HC. What more people want to accept that? Lost to Moya on a 1st round and a semi-average Ferrero. Punished by Clement, Berdych and Youzhny.

R u forgetting that hes frikin 20 and number 2?? :confused: Seriously what did people think of federer when he was 19 and 20? His serve has improved loads and dont forget that he changed his gtip and thats huge for any player. He hasnt been the same as last year on hard courts coz hes trying a different way of winning and going for more winner coz hes not scarred of losing.

Youre a nadal basher but im NOT a nadal tard so i have to agree with youre next statement. Federer is also vulnerable on clay and still, players dont take advantage of that, even clay courters. But they do against nadal.

Players also take advantage of nadal because in a way hes inexperienced and theres a huge difference between pro and experienced. I dont care how long hes been pro, that still doesnt deny the fact that people like moya and hewitt for example are more experienced tennis wise eventhough they lose more.

hitchhiker
09-07-2006, 10:53 AM
because of nadals screaming. if someone did that to me i would go and hit them in the gut during change of ends

oz_boz
09-07-2006, 11:10 AM
Players know now that they have a hitter's chance if they are hitting big and cleanly. It has been done time and time again and they go out onto the court knowing they have a chance. What exactly works against Federer? There is no one thing that you can point to in all of his losses really.

Well, a super-heavy topspin ball to his backhand seems to work pretty well, but at present there is only one person who's game is based on that shot...

The fired-up thing probably has to do with the fact that against Nadal, you will usually have a possibility of being agressive and positive for at least a set. He doesn't seem willing to take command of the matches from the very beginning, he needs some time to find his rythm.

And there is the obvious thing that Nadal is still beatable on quicker surfaces, whereas Roger has been dominating them for almost three years. On clay, I think Nadal's opponents seem just as intimidated as Roger's opponents in Wimbledon, if not even more.

Finally, Nadal is always fired up and that can rub off on the opponent. Federer keeping cool may have the opposite effect.

(BTW, I wouldn't go as far as saying Nadal only has one game plan. He has two: trying do direct the game to his forehand cc and overpower his opponent, or chasing down every shot while waiting for a short ball or an error.)

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 11:10 AM
because of nadals screaming. if someone did that to me i would go and hit them in the gut during change of ends

Thanks for your insightful comment. :worship: The MTF idioticness continues

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 11:14 AM
NYCtennisfan There are loads of people out there who can TRY to outplay roger or take a set from him. I really think Youhzny could beat him. His shots were extremely long, something federer cant take advantage of easily and everytime, noone can actually. Blake should at least take federer to 5 sets if he plays the way he did yesterday..He was just flawless!!

Corey Feldman
09-07-2006, 11:34 AM
:bs: thread alert.

Nadal fans will always come up with new and improved excuses for how the chosen one is falling more and more behind Fed than catching him, as all the little tinkerbells had so smugly predicted a year ago.

Action Jackson
09-07-2006, 11:35 AM
NYCtennisfan There are loads of people out there who can TRY to outplay roger or take a set from him. I really think Youhzny could beat him. His shots were extremely long, something federer cant take advantage of easily and everytime, noone can actually. Blake should at least take federer to 5 sets if he plays the way he did yesterday..He was just flawless!!

Do you seriously watch tennis? Just asking.

hitchhiker
09-07-2006, 11:37 AM
NYCtennisfan There are loads of people out there who can TRY to outplay roger or take a set from him. I really think Youhzny could beat him.


and you called me a idiot? check their head to head and stay off the drugs while posting here, there are children present

Corey Feldman
09-07-2006, 11:37 AM
I really think Youhzny could beat him. His shots were extremely long, something federer cant take advantage of easily and everytimeYep, Fed has had 7 flukey wins over Youzhny.

also, some opp's are fired up and dont show it on the outside,
like fed... he can just handle them better than Rafa can.

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 11:49 AM
Well Escude he obiously wasnt playing the way he did yesterday and thats my opionion and i like it...And how am i finding an excuse for nadal if i JUST said hes not as experienced as the others?

Hitchhiker yes, you could be an idiot considering what u just posted. I KNOW heir head to heads but that still has nothing to do because unlike u, i dont base all my prediction on stupid statistics. Nadals head to head with youzhny was 3-1 before he lost to him yesterday and 2 of his 3 wins came on hard court.And guess what? HE LOST

Gearge Good question. Staying up till 7 am everyday watching tennis. Sorry do u not call that watching tennis?? And YES I THINK BLAKE WAS AMAZING yesterday. Its my opinion. And read my comment again. I said TRY to outplay roger and take a set off him.

Action Jackson
09-07-2006, 12:03 PM
Basically there are reasons why Fed has great records over Youzhny, Davydenko, Haas and Roddick. These for all their respective reasons are very good match ups for Federer.

It's not aeronautical or chemical engineering some match ups are better than others.

Castafiore
09-07-2006, 12:15 PM
Nadal fans will always come up with new and improved excuses for how the chosen one is falling more and more behind Fed than catching him, as all the little tinkerbells had so smugly predicted a year ago.
I know that you're enjoying this but apart from a few exceptions, I don't see a lot of people coming up with excuses actually. :shrug:

Furthermore, the gap in points has not increased since Federer can only defend his victory from last year and Rafa has gone further than last year in the USO.

Granted, I don't see Rafa totally catching up with the Fedmeister any time soon but he's not falling more and more behind at this moment as you so smugly wrote down. :)

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 12:22 PM
^^^I dont care whos umber 1 and whos number and whos losing points because hes gaining them. Federers the one under pressure, like u said he can only defend. And when federer was 19 he wasnt as good as nadal was these past few years.

nobama
09-07-2006, 01:34 PM
NYCtennisfan There are loads of people out there who can TRY to outplay roger or take a set from him. I really think Youhzny could beat him. His shots were extremely long, something federer cant take advantage of easily and everytime, noone can actually. Blake should at least take federer to 5 sets if he plays the way he did yesterday..He was just flawless!!Flawless? Berdych was 0/15 on break point conversions.

nobama
09-07-2006, 01:38 PM
Until something doesn't go his way. That's his only chance of winning tomorrow, to play a perfect match. Once something doesn't go just right, Blake will crumble and roll over for Federer.
We'll have to wait and see though. It should be an interesting match.I don't see that happening. Blake will have the crowd and his "J-Block" behind him. Roger will have to bring it and not let Blake think he has a chance. I certainly hope Roger doesn't go into this match hoping/thinking Blake will just roll over.

jasmin
09-07-2006, 02:54 PM
Roger has been dominating tennis for years, he's beaten everyone. Nadal hasn't, it's called putting in the time and the work. Seniority. I can't understand for the life of me the reason that the majority of Nadal fans can't understand this.

Roger Federer has plan A, B and C.


True and that's why a lot of opponents don't think Rafa measures up to Roger although he has the winning record. Rafa has a few weapons but Roger has the most complete game that I've ever seen.

radics
09-07-2006, 03:13 PM
Maybe Nadal makes hes opponents angry with hes "vamos"? Especially if he makes them after hes "enemies" UEs at 0-0 or 15-15 while staring right in their eyes? At least I would get pissed if he did that to me.

Blue Heart24
09-07-2006, 03:14 PM
good question......that seems true........

Fumus
09-07-2006, 03:33 PM
Nadal is the most fired up guy I know and is Fed biggest rival.

It's all self belief. Nadal doesn't blow anyone off the court like Fed does. If Fed's opponents didn't get blow off court, they would probably get fired up too.

Dumb thread.

NYCtennisfan
09-07-2006, 03:38 PM
Nadal is the most fired up guy I know and is Fed biggest rival.

It's all self belief. Nadal doesn't blow anyone off the court like Fed does. If Fed's opponents didn't get blow off court, they would probably get fired up too.

Dumb thread.

Yup. As soon as Fed starts losing more than once every 4 months (which will happen soon enough--nobody has ever done what Fed has over the last 3 years and nobody can keep it up), you will see a lot more confident players when the matches start.

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 04:53 PM
Flawless? Berdych was 0/15 on break point conversions.

and blake came up with excellent 1st serves. Its not like berdych made an error everytime he got a BP..

Lets see what he does against fed

DDrago2
09-07-2006, 05:21 PM
^^^I dont care whos umber 1 and whos number and whos losing points because hes gaining them. Federers the one under pressure, like u said he can only defend. And when federer was 19 he wasnt as good as nadal was these past few years.

You are funny. By favorably comparing Nadal to Federer, you are showing that you have no idea about what a good player is.

marcRD
09-07-2006, 05:31 PM
Look, I think every player in the world dreams more of beating Federer than NAdal, but when they play Federer they realize there is nothing they can do. They see all these winners getting past them, aswell as great defending from Federer, great returns of 1st serves which should have been aces, great covering in the net, unbelivable passing shots and when they play unbelivable in a game and have 2 break points Federer plays even better and serves much better. There are no holes in his game.

This is not a question about mentality, this is about matchups and quality. Federers tennis is jsut much better than Nadals, Nadals tennis has so much holes on hardcourt.

Even on clay Federer is much better than Nadal on hardcourt (in the last 5 clay tournaments Federer has played only Nadal has beaten him)

mallorn
09-07-2006, 05:50 PM
:bs: thread alert.

Nadal fans will always come up with new and improved excuses for how the chosen one is falling more and more behind Fed than catching him, as all the little tinkerbells had so smugly predicted a year ago.
This isn't to do with this particular thread but a more general question, and not just to Escude.

Do you see the difference between an excuse and a factor and a reason? It's very easy to smugly dismiss attempts at explaining what happened as "excuses" but what does it contribute to the discussion? Players have days off, injuries, ups and downs, etc. and these are all factors in victory and defeat. Why is it impossible on this forum to credit the opponent for good play and analyse what went wrong with your player without being ridiculed for making excuses?

rofe
09-07-2006, 06:03 PM
This isn't to do with this particular thread but a more general question, and not just to Escude.

Do you see the difference between an excuse and a factor and a reason? It's very easy to smugly dismiss attempts at explaining what happened as "excuses" but what does it contribute to the discussion? Players have days off, injuries, ups and downs, etc. and these are all factors in victory and defeat. Why is it impossible on this forum to credit the opponent for good play and analyse what went wrong with your player without being ridiculed for making excuses?

I understand your point but then it works both ways. When Fed lost to Nalbandian at the TMC, some Fed fans claimed that it had something to do with Fed's ankle injury and were openly ridiculed in this forum. I thought it was a logical statement since he indeed had an ankle injury and lacked fitness. I personally think that when a player says that they are ready to play, they are ready to play. No excuses. So Fed lost that day because Nalby played well, nothing more, nothing less.

Nadal could very well be injured, he may have lost the plot after the momentum shift when Misha won a game after being 15-40 down but all of these are excuses because Nadal came to play and they do discredit Misha's performance.

Nadal got outplayed by Misha and the reasons are not that hard to figure out if you watch the match.

mallorn
09-07-2006, 07:56 PM
I understand your point but then it works both ways. When Fed lost to Nalbandian at the TMC, some Fed fans claimed that it had something to do with Fed's ankle injury and were openly ridiculed in this forum. I thought it was a logical statement since he indeed had an ankle injury and lacked fitness. I personally think that when a player says that they are ready to play, they are ready to play. No excuses. So Fed lost that day because Nalby played well, nothing more, nothing less.

Nadal could very well be injured, he may have lost the plot after the momentum shift when Misha won a game after being 15-40 down but all of these are excuses because Nadal came to play and they do discredit Misha's performance.

Nadal got outplayed by Misha and the reasons are not that hard to figure out if you watch the match.
I guess where we differ is that you interpret everything that went on in the match from the point of view of the winner, and everything that is said about the loser is an excuse to you. Why can't we analyse what happened to the player who lost? It doesn't automatically follow that we're discrediting the winner. Two players played the match and they both contributed something to the final result. It's not like the winner usually plays perfect tennis, more often than not he is the player who managed to take better advantage of the opponent's weaker form. How often does it happen that both guys play to the best of their ability?


I wasn't talking about Rafa's last match, I asked the question because I'm tired of seeing the "EXCUSE!" accusation all the time. Rafa said before the match that his ankle had completely recovered. There's no way that I meant to discredit Misha when I said that Rafa blew it when he had set points in the third. It's a fact, he made an error, he blew it, just like Roger did in Rome. I said all along that Misha played incredible tennis and he beat Rafa pure and simple. Rafa had his chances - he didn't take them. That doesn't discredit Misha's win; he was the one who did take his chances and came out on top.

rofe
09-07-2006, 08:18 PM
I guess where we differ is that you interpret everything that went on in the match from the point of view of the winner, and everything that is said about the loser is an excuse to you. Why can't we analyse what happened to the player who lost? It doesn't automatically follow that we're discrediting the winner. Two players played the match and they both contributed something to the final result. It's not like the winner usually plays perfect tennis, more often than not he is the player who managed to take better advantage of the opponent's weaker form. How often does it happen that both guys play to the best of their ability?



Actually I agree with you. Both players contribute to one player's win and the other player's loss. What I am trying to say is that if a player comes to play he/she has weighed the pros and cons of competing on that particular day. If their loss is attributed only to their dismal performance then that is not fair. I didn't say that you are discrediting Misha's performance. All I am saying is that you are trying to dissect Nadal's loss within the context of his performance but you have to take Misha's performance into account as well if you want to analyze it better.

At least, that is what I end up doing when my favourites lose.

mallorn
09-07-2006, 09:05 PM
Actually I agree with you. Both players contribute to one player's win and the other player's loss. What I am trying to say is that if a player comes to play he/she has weighed the pros and cons of competing on that particular day. If their loss is attributed only to their dismal performance then that is not fair.
Précisément. :)

I didn't say that you are discrediting Misha's performance. All I am saying is that you are trying to dissect Nadal's loss within the context of his performance but you have to take Misha's performance into account as well if you want to analyze it better.

At least, that is what I end up doing when my favourites lose.
But I always took Misha's performance into account, from the very beginning. You can see my posts in Rafa's forum. I know it was Misha's positive play and constant pressure that put Rafa on the defensive so much. As for Rafa, his level went up and down during the match, I think he had an iffy start, then improved (at times a lot) but failed at the last moment, and then Misha was so confident he played even better and that brought about Rafa's dismal end. :lol: No, wait, why am I laughing...:sobbing:

Bagelicious
09-07-2006, 09:15 PM
Finally, Nadal is always fired up and that can rub off on the opponent. Federer keeping cool may have the opposite effect.


This is my theory as well. Not to denigrate Rafa's skills as a tennis player, but it's obviously his fire and determination that makes him the winner that he is. You get the feeling that if you could pressure him into lowering his intensity and self belief, then you have a very good chance of beating him. His fire is a bit of a double edged sword - if it doesn't lower his opponent's confidence, it could actually increase it, and it's a weapon that can work against Rafa as well.

Roger just stays cool and calm and doesn't seem to be affected by anything his opponent does (except when he's playing Rafa obviously) and that can be a huge confidence killer. The fact that he's crazy talented even when he's having a bad day is the clincher - his level doesn't drop enough for him to be consistently beatable. Being fired up doesn't seem to work, being composed doesn't seem to work, just playing your game doesn't seem to work so it's easier for opponents to feel like they have no options because they'll just get their ass kicked anyway.

rofe
09-07-2006, 09:41 PM
Roger just stays cool and calm and doesn't seem to be affected by anything his opponent does (except when he's playing Rafa obviously) and that can be a huge confidence killer. The fact that he's crazy talented even when he's having a bad day is the clincher - his level doesn't drop enough for him to be consistently beatable. Being fired up doesn't seem to work, being composed doesn't seem to work, just playing your game doesn't seem to work so it's easier for opponents to feel like they have no options because they'll just get their ass kicked anyway.

That is not true. He puts on a poker face. He admitted that in one of his interviews. He feels that allowing your opponent to see your true emotions is tantamount to surrendering your psychological edge. He also said that he gets tight and nervous but tries to makes sure that it is not visible on his face. In fact during Wimbledon, Jimbo commented that he had difficulty playing Borg because Borg would not show any emotion on court and this prevented Jimbo from waging a psychological war and that Roger reminds him of Borg for that reason.

I think Roger realizes how important a psychological edge over your opponent is in tennis and tries to use it as much as possible.

Bagelicious
09-07-2006, 09:56 PM
That is not true. He puts on a poker face.

I know it's not true, what I meant is that he seems to stay cool and calm. I think it's pretty obvious to any Roger fan that it's a poker face. That's why I put the bit in about him not seeming to be affected by what his opponent does, I guess I wasn't clear enough at the beginning.

lebby
09-07-2006, 09:57 PM
Because almost everyone can beat Nadal on a good day, atherwise against Federer it's all up to him.

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 10:08 PM
DDrago-You are funny. By favorably comparing Nadal to Federer, you are showing that you have no idea about what a good player is.

Actually i do. Im just not like u. I dont bash every player below the top ten. Like many tards on MTF, you obiously think its easy to say 'stop choking and attack' and this is all u do. I said nadal at 19 is better than federer at 19 and that doesnt mean im making an excuse. Its just a statement to make fed tards remember what federer was like at 19 and wha he is now. And its not my fault it takes u a lot to THINK that someones a good player.

I started this thread BEFORE nadal started the match so there definately no excusing him for losing as i said youhzny outplayed him.

Trying to create a simple discussion here, NOT AN ARGUMENT

Bagelicious
09-07-2006, 10:15 PM
Nadal being better than Fed at 19 doesn't mean much. Hewitt was also better than Fed at 19.

supersexynadal
09-07-2006, 11:02 PM
Nadal being better than Fed at 19 doesn't mean much. Hewitt was also better than Fed at 19.
He didnt win as many slams or TMS. No where near. Most of them were on clay which is pretty normal

Corey Feldman
09-07-2006, 11:13 PM
This isn't to do with this particular thread but a more general question, and not just to Escude.

Do you see the difference between an excuse and a factor and a reason? It's very easy to smugly dismiss attempts at explaining what happened as "excuses" but what does it contribute to the discussion? Players have days off, injuries, ups and downs, etc. and these are all factors in victory and defeat. Why is it impossible on this forum to credit the opponent for good play and analyse what went wrong with your player without being ridiculed for making excuses?you have always been a good Rafa fan to me :hug:

Bagelicious
09-07-2006, 11:22 PM
He didnt win as many slams or TMS. No where near. Most of them were on clay which is pretty normal

Well the point is that Nadal is a great player at the age he is now - but that doesn't mean you can just extrapolate and predict the rest of his career from now. He has a long way to go and plenty could happen, positive or negative and no amount of wishing or speculation will make a difference. Just keep things in perspective, that's all I'm saying.

I'm especially cautious in the case of such a young player because they tend to burn out mentally, emotionally or physically. They aren't as tour hardened and pressure and expectations can grind them down more easily.

Players mature and play their best tennis at different rates. Blake, Ljubicic are playing their best tennis now - while in their mid 20s. Hewitt's best tennis years appear to be behind him (not saying there isn't room for a resurgence).

mallorn
09-07-2006, 11:43 PM
you have always been a good Rafa fan to me :hug:
It hasn't always been easy. :awww: ;)

supersexynadal
09-08-2006, 05:48 PM
Well the point is that Nadal is a great player at the age he is now - but that doesn't mean you can just extrapolate and predict the rest of his career from now. He has a long way to go and plenty could happen, positive or negative and no amount of wishing or speculation will make a difference. Just keep things in perspective, that's all I'm saying.

I'm especially cautious in the case of such a young player because they tend to burn out mentally, emotionally or physically. They aren't as tour hardened and pressure and expectations can grind them down more easily.

Players mature and play their best tennis at different rates. Blake, Ljubicic are playing their best tennis now - while in their mid 20s. Hewitt's best tennis years appear to be behind him (not saying there isn't room for a resurgence).

It can actually be a disadvantage to be so good so early. Hes living to expectations most players his age dont. Like when he loses, its a huge deal mentally but when monfils or baghdatis lose, its like theyve still got a long way to go. As for burning out, he should know what hes doing. I dont think he'll burn out physically like we all think

Bagelicious
09-08-2006, 05:58 PM
It can actually be a disadvantage to be so good so early. Hes living to expectations most players his age dont. Like when he loses, its a huge deal mentally but when monfils or baghdatis lose, its like theyve still got a long way to go. As for burning out, he should know what hes doing. I dont think he'll burn out physically like we all think

:yeah: I'm glad we agree on this. I also agree with you on the physical burnout thing - I've heard this argument, but I don't think it'll hold up in this case. I think players on tour are fitter and more intelligent and careful with their bodies these days.

supersexynadal
09-08-2006, 06:22 PM
:yeah: I'm glad we agree on this. I also agree with you on the physical burnout thing - I've heard this argument, but I don't think it'll hold up in this case. I think players on tour are fitter and more intelligent and careful with their bodies these days.
yep..besides injuries and freak accidents, i dont see anything stopping him. The thing he suddenly started to tke things slowly AFTER he sudenly rose to number 2. He kept winning mot of last ear and the year before and then hes suddenly realizing he cant keep winning on hard courts and grass with a game like that. Sory, englsh isnt my first language :)

Just Cause
09-09-2006, 05:56 PM
I think they are afraid. Nadal is too young and cute.