Nadal's chances for the Calendar Year Grand Slam 2009? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal's chances for the Calendar Year Grand Slam 2009?

federernadalfan
02-01-2009, 03:52 PM
He started off this year taking his first HC slam. His chances are strong in both the French and Wimbly. Will he be able to also take the US Open and complete the calendar year grand slam? If not the US open, will he be able to sweep three of the four grand slams this year? What do you guys honestly think are his chances?

lurker
02-01-2009, 04:13 PM
Firstly, I always believed he would win this AO final. Despite the semis and 'unfair' scheduling. His game, this surface, vs Federer = victory for Rafa 99% of the time.

Roland Garros has been his, but he has a new challenger in Verdasco. He could still get Roland Garros, chances are still 99%, barring injury.

Wimbledon will be a tougher hurdle. It's not just Fed, but Murray he has to 'mow down.' He'd have to really push himself, and maybe hope Fed and Murray beat each other up on the opposite side of the draw. Chances 80-90% depending on draw.

Without the Beijing Olympics in the way this year, he can prep more for the US Open. But this is a BIG ask. I'd give him 60% or less on US Open.

Mateya
02-01-2009, 04:26 PM
Voted for only two slams this year...

I have a feeling something will go wrong at Wimby and he is always exhausted when hardcourt season and september comes around. USopen is the toughest of all slams to win for Rafa.

But what do I know, Rafzilla keeps surprising me all the time. :)

Snowwy
02-01-2009, 04:28 PM
Not gonna happen

out_here_grindin
02-01-2009, 04:33 PM
The US Open will be very difficult. It is Federer, Murray and Djokovic's best slam. Plus someone like Tsonga or Del Potro is more dangerous on the fast court to Nadal.

So no to the US this year.

Xoman
02-01-2009, 05:09 PM
I predict that this question (and thread) will be alive and kicking well into the second week of the US open 2009. But at that time in the future the question will be: what are the chances of Nadal of winning the next 3/2/1 matches?

DartMarcus
02-01-2009, 05:09 PM
RG - yes
Wimby - ???
Us open - no

Elena.
02-01-2009, 05:10 PM
He can win 3 this year most probably in my opinion

iriraz
02-01-2009, 05:22 PM
Nadal`s problem is that he always gets tired when it comes to the Us Open.If he wants to concentrate more on slams then he shouldn`t play that many clay court events and not try to win every MM title.

SheepleBuster
02-01-2009, 05:29 PM
I think Rafa will win 2 slams total this year. I don't see him losing to anyone at French (God please let Federer lose early as I don't want to see bagels served). But Wimbledon, he could play a guy like Karlovic or Roddick and they can get hot with their serve, who knows. I think Verdasco could be dangerous on Grass too. So we shall see.

siddy
02-01-2009, 05:45 PM
My bet: Australian and French (and I already predicted him to win the Aussie before the match). Wimby will be tough (I'd say 50-60% -- he needs a good draw) and US Open will be tougher (too much competition there).

My bets for the rest of the year:
French: Rafa
Wimby: Roger (if Rafa makes the final again, it's a tossup)
USO: Murray

finishingmove
02-01-2009, 06:26 PM
chances are good

rafa_maniac
04-20-2009, 06:43 AM
Ask me after Wimbledon.

tea
04-20-2009, 07:42 AM
Well, he won 2 Slams atm.(AO+RG) He has a big chance to defend the title on green clay of London.
But if he wins the US Open this sport should be canceled immediately.:o

vamosinator
04-20-2009, 07:52 AM
Wimbledon will be the easiest slam for Nadal, he won't drop a set at Wimbledon and I can see him winning many Wimbledon crowns in the coming years and challenge Sampras for all-time grasscourt greatness.

Roland Garros there is a good chance he will drop a couple of sets. Nadal is hitting the forehand with less spin and it helps his development on hardcourts but will reduce some of his dominance on clay as some of those crosscourt put-aways lack the margin for error now hence more unforced errors.

US Open Nadal be in better physical condition this time around and even last year he cruised through (in terms of not dropping sets) before he got to Murray. Nadal will cruise through again but this time Murray won't be able to stop him, and these recent wins over Murray are the key to that.

ossie
04-20-2009, 08:37 AM
wimbledon and french open are his to lose and with a bit of luck he should be able to win uso

vamos rafa

ballbasher101
04-20-2009, 09:32 AM
Nadal will win 2 majors this year. He is not going to win Wimbledon or the US open this year. Winning 2 majors is still a good achievement.

born_on_clay
04-20-2009, 09:55 AM
Who of you before Australian Open claimed that Rafa is going to win it?
Most of you were sure that he won't make it. Moreover there were voices he won't win AO ever.
So I'm just telling you don't underestimate Rafa

99% he will win FO
80% he will win Wim
70% he will win USO

Black Raven
04-20-2009, 10:03 AM
He will win the FO.
He may win Wimby.
He might win the USO.

Stefanos13
04-20-2009, 10:58 AM
He will win the FO.
He may win Wimby.
He might win the USO.

Yep!

NadalSharapova
04-20-2009, 05:06 PM
Nadal will win 2 majors this year. He is not going to win Wimbledon or the US open this year. Winning 2 majors is still a good achievement.

who can beat nadal at wimby?:confused:

vamosinator
04-20-2009, 05:12 PM
Wimbledon is going to be the slam people remember Nadal for, he ain't losing there for a long long time.

Modetopia
04-22-2009, 06:38 PM
fool for love:p

ugotlobbed
04-22-2009, 11:26 PM
i think nadal will prob win all 4 the way he is looking, and what would that do to fed? the hardest slam for him will be the us open

ORGASMATRON
04-22-2009, 11:58 PM
It wil be hard with Djoker, Murray and Fed around. I think he can definitely do three. But four is pushing it. Fed will desperately want to make it 6 straight at the US while Murray will desperatly want to win his first slam. Murray already beat Nadal last year at the US, i dont know how you expect him to lose this year. He will be even more improved by then and the surface will suit him and Fed both better then NAdal.

Henry Kaspar
04-23-2009, 12:04 AM
RG 0.8 X Wimby 0.5 X USO 0.4 == 8 percent.

Federerhingis
04-23-2009, 12:21 AM
He will win the FO.
He may win Wimby.
He might win the USO.

That's how I see it as well.

Roland is his unless he has a freak accident or it was just not meant to be.

Wimbledon, he will still be considered the favorite to take Wimbledon given last years result, his results on grass the past 4 yrs and given Roger's current mental state.

US Open, Nadal only comes in as the third or fourth best player on Hard courts, Murray, Novak and Roger in great form beat Nadal on great form playing the faster US Open courst where the bounce is much lower.

vamosinator
04-23-2009, 01:32 AM
A lot of people are going to get a rude shock at this year's US Open if they expect Djokovic to beat Nadal and Murray to beat Nadal, they forget the physical condition Nadal was in after the Olympics (an Olympics where he beat Djokovic on hardcourt faster than New York).

madlove
04-23-2009, 01:50 AM
he'll win 2 or at most, 3. us open very unlikely.

meihaditalab
04-23-2009, 02:36 AM
Well, Rafa already has that AO, he's pretty much got the French Open and he's the favorite in Wimbledon, I think he's going to have more trouble winning the US then anything else. But he showed the world he can win a GS on hard court after the AO so I think he could win the US

LinkMage
04-23-2009, 02:38 AM
Rafito will win the Golden Slam for sure. RG and Wimbledon are already in the bag. No way he doesn't defend the Olympics. Only question is the USO but he is the favorite there.

BAMOS!!!!! :rocker2:

christallh24
04-23-2009, 03:22 AM
One of those to early to call questions. If he wins both FO and Wimbledon again (?), I would say...75%.

casabe
04-23-2009, 03:28 AM
who can beat nadal at wimby?:confused:

as far as I know....srichapan, muller, federer and federer

Swiss Mountain
04-23-2009, 03:50 AM
Nadal is lucky Fed ins't in his primes anymore, because Fed would have headbutt him at Wimbledon like in 2006, and at the USO like at the master Cup 2006.
Two 6/0 in the year, that was fun times... Sniff

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 03:54 AM
Nadal is lucky Fed ins't in his primes anymore, because Fed would have headbutt him at Wimbledon like in 2006, and at the USO like at the master Cup 2006.
Two 6/0 in the year, that was fun times... Sniff

Fun times indeed.

prima donna
04-23-2009, 04:02 AM
Doesn't matter -- his brand of tennis shall remain vulgar nonetheless.

christallh24
04-23-2009, 04:03 AM
Nadal is lucky Fed ins't in his primes anymore, because Fed would have headbutt him at Wimbledon like in 2006, and at the USO like at the master Cup 2006.
Two 6/0 in the year, that was fun times... Sniff

He's lucky? Rafa has been playing Roger since 2004, has a 13-6 record and a 8-2 in slams, if you include their meeting in the semi-final in 2005. I guess none of those 13 wins came against Roger when he was in his prime, huh? :rolleyes:

Winners take all
04-23-2009, 04:18 AM
RG 0.8 X Wimby 0.5 X USO 0.4 == 8 percent.
That's 16% dude. I guess youre a Fedchoker-tard.
Nadal is lucky Fed ins't in his primes anymore, because Fed would have headbutt him at Wimbledon like in 2006, and at the USO like at the master Cup 2006.
Two 6/0 in the year, that was fun times... Sniff
It's in fact the other way around. During his prime the Swiss Pussy was fcuking lucky for not having to deal with such full-or-near-full-grown capable adversaries as the current Rafa, Djoker, and Murray.

Greatness
04-23-2009, 04:24 AM
Nadal's chances are pretty damn good. I can easily see him winning Roland Garros and Wimbledon - not so sure about the USO but the will and motivation he would have acquired by winning 3 slams in a row might be more than enough to carry him to victory.

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 04:28 AM
He's lucky? Rafa has been playing Roger since 2004, has a 13-6 record and a 8-2 in slams, if you include their meeting in the semi-final in 2005. I guess none of those 13 wins came against Roger when he was in his prime, huh? :rolleyes:

Up untill last year the only wins in slams came on clay and most of their matches is on that mug surface anyway. So the h2h doesnt mean much. The Rafatards keep referring to it but they keep forgetting the 13-6 record that really matters.

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 04:40 AM
Doesn't matter -- his brand of tennis shall remain vulgar nonetheless.

:worship: Repulsive!

vamosinator
04-23-2009, 04:48 AM
The people that said Nadal wouldn't win the Australian Open are at it again. Their logic was that because Tsonga beat Nadal in straight sets at the Australian Open 2008 then Nadal won't win the Australian Open. Now they're saying because Murray beat Nadal in 4 sets in the US Open that Nadal won't win the US Open. Same story different slam, same failed logic:o:o

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 04:53 AM
The people that said Nadal wouldn't win the Australian Open are at it again. Their logic was that because Tsonga beat Nadal in straight sets at the Australian Open 2008 then Nadal won't win the Australian Open. Now they're saying because Murray beat Nadal in 4 sets in the US Open that Nadal won't win the US Open. Same story different slam, same failed logic:o:o

Why do you have Nadal and Ali next to each other. It doesnt make sense.

Fiberlight1
04-23-2009, 04:54 AM
Up untill last year the only wins in slams came on clay and most of their matches is on that mug surface anyway. So the h2h doesnt mean much. The Rafatards keep referring to it but they keep forgetting the 13-6 record that really matters.

Hahaha..

It's hilarious how you Fed-tards call your messiah the GOAT... when he isn't even the GOAT in his own generation :haha::haha::haha:

As for Nadal's chances... 30%.

vamosinator
04-23-2009, 04:57 AM
Why do you have Nadal and Ali next to each other. It doesnt make sense.

Yeah I almost considered putting Jordan and Nadal but ALI seems to be more fitting, since ALI defeated the guy everyone thought was unbeatable (Foreman) and Nadal defeated the guy everyone thought was GOAT (Federer):o

heartbroken
04-23-2009, 04:58 AM
Up untill last year the only wins in slams came on clay and most of their matches is on that mug surface anyway. So the h2h doesnt mean much. The Rafatards keep referring to it but they keep forgetting the 13-6 record that really matters.

Ruan, old friend, you're going to have to help me understand this comment! :)

In the "Who Can Stop Nadal" thread, you argued that Federer had to be better than Sampras because he was a better clay court player. (An argument that certainly has merit...pros and cons for both players, blah, blah, etc.)

Now, you just said it is a "mug surface". :lol: Now, I don't care which side you pick, but can you clarify once and for all whether clay does or doesn't matter?

Sincerely,
Major Dillweed

P.S. You don't really need to answer. I'm just bustin' your chops. :p

heartbroken
04-23-2009, 05:04 AM
Why do you have Nadal and Ali next to each other. It doesnt make sense.

I thought that was Tsonga next to Nadal? :D:p

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 05:06 AM
Ruan, old friend, you're going to have to help me understand this comment! :)

In the "Who Can Stop Nadal" thread, you argued that Federer had to be better than Sampras because he was a better clay court player. (An argument that certainly has merit...pros and cons for both players, blah, blah, etc.)

Now, you just said it is a "mug surface". :lol: Now, I don't care which side you pick, but can you clarify once and for all whether clay does or doesn't matter?

Sincerely,
Major Dillweed

P.S. You don't really need to answer. I'm just bustin' your chops. :p

:haha:

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 05:09 AM
I thought that was Tsonga next to Nadal? :D:p

How can you put someone as talented as Ali in the same frame as Nadal. Blows my mind. Rafafans must be the most delusional fans on the planet.

vamosinator
04-23-2009, 05:13 AM
How can you put someone as talented as Ali in the same frame as Nadal. Blows my mind. Rafafans must be the most delusional fans on the planet.

Speaking of delusional, have you heard how Federer's fans still think he's the GOAT?:D

ORGASMATRON
04-23-2009, 05:23 AM
Speaking of delusional, have you heard how Federer's fans still think he's the GOAT?:D

He is the GOAT

vamosinator
04-23-2009, 05:40 AM
He is the GOAT

You need the Calendar Year Grand Slam for a title like that, Federer never even got the Career Grand Slam, plus it would help if you are the best player of your era:rolleyes:

robiht
04-24-2009, 05:04 AM
IMO:
RG = 95%,unless some injury happens,he will take the 5th straight title for sure.Its almost equal to 100%.
Wimby = 60%,Federer can beat him in the final (or semifinal)?
Maybe Djoko,Murray,Roddick has small chances against him.But they can lose before the semis or the final...
USO = 40%,It's the hardest to win,cause he usually tired in the last quarter of the year.But there is no olimpycs this year,so he has a better chance than last year.

60+40/2=50% chance to win all the 4 Grand Slam's this year.

guptaji
04-24-2009, 05:40 AM
Speaking of delusional, have you heard how Federer's fans still think he's the GOAT?:D

:haha:

Chloe le Bopper
04-24-2009, 05:43 AM
You need the Calendar Year Grand Slam for a title like that, Federer never even got the Career Grand Slam, plus it would help if you are the best player of your era:rolleyes:

Nadal has only been better than Federer over the past 12 months or so. Until Wimbledon 2008, Nadal was the best on clay and lead their head-to-head, but was still a clear number 2.
Federer is most certainly the best player of his own "era" (which includes Safin, Federer, Hewitt, etc). Even if you insist on absurdly grouping him with players that are half a decade younger, until Nadal wins another handful of slams, Federer is still ahead.

Chloe le Bopper
04-24-2009, 05:46 AM
Speaking of delusional, have you heard how Federer's fans still think he's the GOAT?:D
All of us with reason believe that he's at least among the GOAT.

2003
04-24-2009, 05:58 AM
Why do you have Nadal and Ali next to each other. It doesnt make sense.

It's actually Nadal and Tsonga, there to remind him and everyone else what they all know deep down, what Rafa will always be remembered for, that anialhation in AO 2008 to Tsonga. It was then his 1 dimensional topspin retreiver game was brutally exposed. I suggest Federer watch that game sometime. :p

One thing I will say is do not count out Murray at Wimbledon. People forget he did not play there in 2007 due to injury, in 2008 he was very unexperienced and tired from the Gasgay 5 set saga.

If Murray and Nadal meet at Wimbledon again, I guarantee the result will be much closer. Gulbis took a set of Rafa at wimbledon also so Rafa has arguably just as many threats there as at US open (well almost as many). Dont forget how hungry Fed will be, if Fed drops his seeding at Wimbledon and they meet in the semis he might be better off (Federer).

morningglory
04-24-2009, 06:27 AM
funny how ppl still think Federer is still a major threat to Nadal :lol:
Nadal has more to worry about from the other players. Uncle Toni did a great job messing with Federer's head. :o

vamosinator
04-24-2009, 06:37 AM
Yes Uncle Toni screwed Federer ROYALLY:o

ORGASMATRON
04-24-2009, 07:58 AM
It's actually Nadal and Tsonga, there to remind him and everyone else what they all know deep down, what Rafa will always be remembered for, that anialhation in AO 2008 to Tsonga. It was then his 1 dimensional topspin retreiver game was brutally exposed. I suggest Federer watch that game sometime. :p

One thing I will say is do not count out Murray at Wimbledon. People forget he did not play there in 2007 due to injury, in 2008 he was very unexperienced and tired from the Gasgay 5 set saga.

If Murray and Nadal meet at Wimbledon again, I guarantee the result will be much closer. Gulbis took a set of Rafa at wimbledon also so Rafa has arguably just as many threats there as at US open (well almost as many). Dont forget how hungry Fed will be, if Fed drops his seeding at Wimbledon and they meet in the semis he might be better off (Federer).

Great post. I agree.

ORGASMATRON
04-24-2009, 08:03 AM
Nadal has only been better than Federer over the past 12 months or so. Until Wimbledon 2008, Nadal was the best on clay and lead their head-to-head, but was still a clear number 2.
Federer is most certainly the best player of his own "era" (which includes Safin, Federer, Hewitt, etc). Even if you insist on absurdly grouping him with players that are half a decade younger, until Nadal wins another handful of slams, Federer is still ahead.

I didnt even bother responding to that logic. Dont forget Federer also retired Sampras and he dominated Agassi. Thats an even earlier era. The Rafatards put way too much weight on the h2h, it was mostly played on clay.

vamosinator
04-24-2009, 08:12 AM
I'm looking forward to more Wimbledon and hard court slam Finals v Federer personally, its apparent Nadal will be the favorite.

Swiss Mountain
04-24-2009, 10:26 PM
That's 16% dude. I guess youre a Fedchoker-tard.

It's in fact the other way around. During his prime the Swiss Pussy was fcuking lucky for not having to deal with such full-or-near-full-grown capable adversaries as the current Rafa, Djoker, and Murray.

Swiss pussy? so I guess all the other players are pussies since nobody was ever able to be n1 for 4yrs in a row, and the spaniard pussy stayed 4yrs as n2!
What a pussy, he had to wait for Roger's decline and mono to be n1!
wow, what an acheivement! hahaha:crazy:

Swiss Mountain
04-24-2009, 10:32 PM
He's lucky? Rafa has been playing Roger since 2004, has a 13-6 record and a 8-2 in slams, if you include their meeting in the semi-final in 2005. I guess none of those 13 wins came against Roger when he was in his prime, huh? :rolleyes:

Do you understand rafa is lucky by circumstancies?
if Fed was 22 and Nadal 27 and 4 masters were play on grass and nadal being awesome on grass and roger not good enough on clay to met rafa in a slam, it would be the opposite?

Hello boy, wake up please my friend :) be fair.

Swiss Mountain
04-24-2009, 11:26 PM
Yeah I almost considered putting Jordan and Nadal but ALI seems to be more fitting, since ALI defeated the guy everyone thought was unbeatable (Foreman) and Nadal defeated the guy everyone thought was GOAT (Federer):o

wtf???????

remember on the famous show with Jon Stewart in 2007 they mention Fed : Ali and Nadal: Frazier!

Be on the news, you may be a fan, but don't be blind!

The Joke was "Roger: Rafa, you will always be my Frazier'
Which means: you give me and my tennis more fans, poeple love to see the champion/legend challenged by the young, and in this case it is a 'bourrin' 'besogneux' how do you say in english? French fellows, please help me.

That was not nice to Nadal but Clearly Jon Stewart is a Federer fan (Letterman too), who isn't actually apart from the 13 years old girls teens, still virgin and loving torso without hair?

NadalSharapova
04-24-2009, 11:33 PM
wtf???????

remember on the famous show with Jon Stewart in 2007 they mention Fed : Ali and Nadal: Frazier!

Be on the news, you may be a fan, but don't be blind!

The Joke was "Roger: Rafa, you will always be my Frazier'
Which means: you give me and my tennis more fans, poeple love to see the champion/legend challenged by the young, and in this case it is a 'bourrin' 'besogneux' how do you say in english? French fellows, please help me.

That was not nice to Nadal but Clearly Jon Stewart is a Federer fan (Letterman too), who isn't actually apart from the 13 years old girls teens, still virgin and loving torso without hair?

Did Frazier OWN ali and make him cry after a match? :rolleyes:

Tennislover3001
04-24-2009, 11:39 PM
I think the chances are good, but I'm doubtful he'll win the Us.

r2473
04-24-2009, 11:43 PM
You know, it actually could happen.

I hope he does. I am not a Nadal fan, but as hard as he has worked on his game to become the best he can be, I think it would be well deserved.

christallh24
04-25-2009, 01:34 AM
Do you understand rafa is lucky by circumstancies?
if Fed was 22 and Nadal 27 and 4 masters were play on grass and nadal being awesome on grass and roger not good enough on clay to met rafa in a slam, it would be the opposite?

Hello boy, wake up please my friend :) be fair.

Oooookay.

Ummm...how am I not being fair? I'm going by their actual record, not twisted logic and what ifs. Alright, first let me say, I am a Rafa fan first, but I'm also a fan of Roger. I hate these Rafa vs Roger arguments, but Roger has more than enough defenders and accomplishments that speak for themselves. Rafa hasn't of yet.

Roger, met a fledgling or "one-dimentional:rolleyes:" Rafa enough during 2004-07 (his prime) to have a more positive H2H against him. He's given Rafa run for his money time and again. Had 3 MP's against him in Rome and BEAT him in Hamburg. So, he knows it can be done.

Ugh, look, I don't even remember what my original point was, lol, and I'm not going to get into circluar "if" arguments.

BTW, I'm not a boy, and you can call me Christal. If you'd like to, I mean.:)

vamosinator
04-25-2009, 04:30 AM
Oooookay.

Ummm...how am I not being fair? I'm going by their actual record, not twisted logic and what ifs. Alright, first let me say, I am a Rafa fan first, but I'm also a fan of Roger. I hate these Rafa vs Roger arguments, but Roger has more than enough defenders and accomplishments that speak for themselves. Rafa hasn't of yet.

Roger, met a fledgling or "one-dimentional:rolleyes:" Rafa enough during 2004-07 (his prime) to have a more positive H2H against him. He's given Rafa run for his money time and again. Had 3 MP's against him in Rome and BEAT him in Hamburg. So, he knows it can be done.

Ugh, look, I don't even remember what my original point was, lol, and I'm not going to get into circluar "if" arguments.

BTW, I'm not a boy, and you can call me Christal. If you'd like to, I mean.:)

Whats more convincing, losing when you have 3 MP's or just losing? I think when you have 3 MP's and you lose it suggests you are a choker or at least not clutch. Federer wasn't mentally strong then and he isn't mentally strong now. When he's put to the test he doesn't come through, except Roddick could never put him to the test so we never saw it until he played Nadal.

Even during Federer's prime, Nadal had a postive head-to-head, so there was never any doubt who was better. And you can't dismiss the head-to-head and say 'Nadal won most of them on clay so its a faulty head-to-head', otherwise I can say 'Federer had most of his wins over Nadal on hardcourt so its a faulty head-to-head'. You have to respect the surfaces and admit that Nadal has always been the better player and continues to prove it as he wins more than Federer each year.

Chloe le Bopper
04-25-2009, 08:45 AM
I didnt even bother responding to that logic. Dont forget Federer also retired Sampras and he dominated Agassi. Thats an even earlier era. The Rafatards put way too much weight on the h2h, it was mostly played on clay.

Federer didn't retire Sampras. Sampras retired himself after winning the 2002 USO.

Rafa = Fed Killa
04-25-2009, 05:36 PM
Some one should tell the mountain Fedtard that Ali never cried after getting his ass kicked. Ali was a real man, Fed is not.

Nadal will be the GOAT (over 14 GS) and Fed will be the little clown he made cry.

Fed was lucky he played in a era of scared little girls. Now that a real man like Rafa has come you can see Feds fear and pathetic game.

christallh24
04-25-2009, 06:42 PM
Whats more convincing, losing when you have 3 MP's or just losing? I think when you have 3 MP's and you lose it suggests you are a choker or at least not clutch. Federer wasn't mentally strong then and he isn't mentally strong now. When he's put to the test he doesn't come through, except Roddick could never put him to the test so we never saw it until he played Nadal.

About Roger not being mentally strong, I'll give you that to extent. Roger was just so dominate and inspired such intimadation, that no one really dared to stand toe-to-toe with him. And after becoming so dominate, he was never tested enough to exercise the mental toughness that Rafa has. He (Rafa) had to fight and claw his way to the top. Which, is why I came to love him.

The first time Rafael and Roger played each other, Rafa had the self-belief and fearlessness of youth. Plus, the fact that he really looked up to Roger and if he could beat him, it might means good things going forward.

Even during Federer's prime, Nadal had a postive head-to-head, so there was never any doubt who was better. And you can't dismiss the head-to-head and say 'Nadal won most of them on clay so its a faulty head-to-head', otherwise I can say 'Federer had most of his wins over Nadal on hardcourt so its a faulty head-to-head'. You have to respect the surfaces and admit that Nadal has always been the better player and continues to prove it as he wins more than Federer each year.

Ugh, you are forcing me to sound like Rafa disliker. Yes, he had a positive head-to-head to Roger. That didn't necessarily make Rafa the better player. Especially, back then when he wasn't half as good as he is now. I mean, could he have won Wimbledon or AO back then? And the fact that most of those wins did come on clay, which is inarguably Rafa's best surface, you can't look past.

Well, to end with some feel good Rafa stuff. What makes me so proud to be his fan, is that it took Roger a semis and 2 finals and he's no closer to winning the FO(Yet. Who knows this might be the year.). At Rafa's first Wimbledon final, he took Roger to 4 sets. His second, 5 AND COULD HAVE WON!...and the third time being to charm, his first (and hopefully not only) Wimbledon.

The fact that things didn't come easy for him, that he had to work for it, doesn't and shouldn't detract from what a great player he is.

BlackSilver
04-25-2009, 07:17 PM
Something between "very small" and "something above zero".

amonb
04-25-2009, 07:25 PM
Some one should tell the mountain Fedtard that Ali never cried after getting his ass kicked. Ali was a real man, Fed is not.

Nadal will be the GOAT (over 14 GS) and Fed will be the little clown he made cry.

Fed was lucky he played in a era of scared little girls. Now that a real man like Rafa has come you can see Feds fear and pathetic game.

Touche!:clap2:

asmazif
04-26-2009, 12:12 AM
I think he's got the best chance out of anybody

Fed=ATPTourkilla
04-26-2009, 12:25 PM
I think he's got the best chance out of anybody

Seeing as it is not theoretically possible for anyone else to win the calendar slam this year, I think that is a fair comment. :)

NadalSharapova
04-26-2009, 02:02 PM
Seeing as it is not theoretically possible for anyone else to win the calendar slam this year, I think that is a fair comment. :)

i think he meant a better chance than anyone ever had in the history of the atp open era

Ackms421
04-26-2009, 02:08 PM
i think he meant a better chance than anyone ever had in the history of the atp open era

Yes, IMO, this is correct. There have been spectacular, all-court players before, but no one who was a favorite against everyone else on any surface (Nadal is favored against Murray too people, maybe not by a lot on a fast hard court, but still favored nonetheless). This is the first time it has been this viable a possibility. Agassi always had Sampras at Wimbledon. Federer always had Nadal at Roland Garros. Sampras always was neutered on the clay. Nadal, OTOH, has no one who is his absolute superior on any surface.

After all, whether it was windy or not, 6-1 6-2 against your closest rival on their best surface speaks solidly of your CYGS chances. :angel:

rafa_maniac
04-26-2009, 02:54 PM
Yes, IMO, this is correct. There have been spectacular, all-court players before, but no one who was a favorite against everyone else on any surface (Nadal is favored against Murray too people, maybe not by a lot on a fast hard court, but still favored nonetheless). This is the first time it has been this viable a possibility. Agassi always had Sampras at Wimbledon. Federer always had Nadal at Roland Garros. Sampras always was neutered on the clay. Nadal, OTOH, has no one who is his absolute superior on any surface.

After all, whether it was windy or not, 6-1 6-2 against your closest rival on their best surface speaks solidly of your CYGS chances. :angel:

Well, I would say that Federer was the favourite to win any match he played in both 04 and 05 :shrug: It took quite a while for people to accept Nadal as the "favourite" in even their clay H2H, probably after RG 06 :lol:

NadalSharapova
04-26-2009, 03:08 PM
Well, I would say that Federer was the favourite to win any match he played in both 04 and 05 :shrug: It took quite a while for people to accept Nadal as the "favourite" in even their clay H2H, probably after RG 06 :lol:

yes it was crazy, RG 2005 and even monte carlo 06, federer was the favourite I remember odds were 2.2 for RG 05 and odds of 2.1 at MC 06 for nadal to beat fed. I made a lot of money from those two matches. After that Nadal was always fav on clay.

asmazif
04-26-2009, 03:12 PM
No, I actually meant he had the best chance out of anyone this year. I was joking.

Ackms421
04-26-2009, 03:23 PM
Well, I would say that Federer was the favourite to win any match he played in both 04 and 05 :shrug: It took quite a while for people to accept Nadal as the "favourite" in even their clay H2H, probably after RG 06 :lol:

Yeah, I guess more what I mean is that Nadal is the first to have a favorable chance of doing it without having one-major-roadblock in the way. Once they'd played a few times, Nadal was always going to be a problem for Federer at the French. There's no such person holding this position *anywhere* with respect to Nadal.

rafa_maniac
04-26-2009, 03:54 PM
Yeah, I guess more what I mean is that Nadal is the first to have a favorable chance of doing it without having one-major-roadblock in the way. Once they'd played a few times, Nadal was always going to be a problem for Federer at the French. There's no such person holding this position *anywhere* with respect to Nadal.

Ok, I understand. But I do think Federer 04 was in the same situation, with no Nadal on clay in sight ;)

Fed=ATPTourkilla
04-30-2009, 08:57 PM
I don't know why people have been so dismissive of this possibility.

The French Open is his for the taking.

The only person who can stop him at Wimbledon is Federer and, although the last two finals have been titanic struggles, Federer will always choke when it gets tight, usually with a tame backhand return into the bottom of the net when breakpoint up. Don't tell me Murray can stop him at Wimbledon after the terrible beating Nadal dished out last year.

There are a few players who can stop him at the USO but I think his chances there have been understated. Remember, he won the Olympics on the same surface.

At the very least, it is a strong possibility that Nadal will walk out to a USO quarter-final three wins away from the calendar year GS.

fred perry
04-30-2009, 09:29 PM
murray and djok can stop him at wimby and the us open is going to be a brdige too far in 2009 for king rafa.

Henry Kaspar
04-30-2009, 10:07 PM
I don't know why people have been so dismissive of this possibility.

Why don't you put subjective probabilities on all three tournaments and then do the maths.

For example: RG 80 percent plus Wimbledon 50 percent plus US Open 50 percent results in a 20 percent chance for the season slam. Not impossible, but certainly not even odds either.

faboozadoo15
04-30-2009, 10:22 PM
I wouldn't put Nadal at 50% likely against the field at either Wimbledon or the US Open. I'd say his chances at "the grand slam" are less than 10%.

superslam77
04-30-2009, 10:37 PM
even by the highest rafatard standard he is no way odds-on wich i asume is more than 50%(i consider something the majority when it's 50 or more %)...

so let's be a swinetard and say:
AO 100%-done
RG 95%-formality,injury aside.
WB 75%-let's say only fed has half chance
US 50%-saying he will win it but he never made the final(he's done weirder things so...)

1.00*0.95*0.75*0.50=0.35625
around 35.6% by highest standards... that is not "odds-on"
(and if he does win someone has to check for dna doping seriously they should save his blood so he is found guilty in 10-20 years when they will be able to detect it)

Vaccine
04-30-2009, 10:59 PM
How much I would love it to be, it's not gonna happen. I don't know why people make themselves so delusional.

Bazooka
04-30-2009, 11:14 PM
Wait at least until he is in Wimbledon semis... unless you feel a sudden urge to waste your time, and others'.

BTW, Winning AO + RG in the same year is something that hasn't happened in 17 years. That's an achievement good enough, and 2 slams / year is the "standard" in tennis domination, very few times in the Open era a guy has won 3 slams per year. It's just that Roger made it look easy, but it isn't. So enjoy the current clay season and forget about that for now.

aferlo
05-01-2009, 10:33 AM
Altough itīs too early, I think this is the year. His game is so supperior to the rest of players nowadays that I donīt think itīs possible to mantain such a difference for many years. His chances in RG and W are clear, and this year he is running much less than before so probably he can arrive to the last Grand Slam in better shape. I guess that if he gets the first three GS, he will not play one of the hardcourt MS previous to USO (Montreal or Cincinnati)

jcadam2003
05-01-2009, 10:41 AM
Altough itīs too early, I think this is the year. His game is so supperior to the rest of players nowadays that I donīt think itīs possible to mantain such a difference for many years. His chances in RG and W are clear, and this year he is running much less than before so probably he can arrive to the last Grand Slam in better shape. I guess that if he gets the first three GS, he will not play one of the hardcourt MS previous to USO (Montreal or Cincinnati)

I don't think that he should skip one of the masters. It was the Olympics that caused the calendar to be squeezed last year. Because of the Olympics, they moved up the two North American Masters events to July, giving the players only two weeks rest btwn Wimbledon and Canada. Playing those two tournaments plus the Olympics 14 time zones away and then back to NYC was just madness. This year Rafa can play both Masters with a proper break after Wimbledon and still be fresh enough for the US Open.

kingfederer
05-01-2009, 11:33 AM
give it a rest, no grand slam is guaranteed, djokovic is playing well and could be dangerous at roland garros.

Action Jackson
05-31-2009, 07:40 PM
Odds on for the Slam, hmm.

DrJules
05-31-2009, 07:42 PM
Odds on for the Slam, hmm.

Never thought he would do it,but expected failure at the US Open.

federernadalfan
05-31-2009, 07:52 PM
can't believe rg of all slams would slip his grasp...

Sapeod
05-31-2009, 07:52 PM
After his RG loss, I guess he only wins one slam for 2009.

alter ego
05-31-2009, 08:51 PM
I always wanted to do this

http://ui30.gamespot.com/2397/vaderfail_2.jpg

rafa_maniac
05-31-2009, 09:04 PM
Oops! At least we don't have to hear any more about this again... Wouldn't it be the irony of ironies though if Rafa wins all BUT the French this year :lol: