Tennis greats gaga over Nadal [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Tennis greats gaga over Nadal

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 07:39 PM
NADAL ATTRACTS ATTENTION
By Mark Staniforth

Rafael Nadal's amazing surge towards the top of the world rankings has captured the imaginations of some of the biggest names in world tennis.

The 18-year-old Spaniard has won five tournaments this season including his last three in succession to reach the world's top five.

And now Nadal is already being talked about above the likes of Roger Federer and Guillermo Coria as a potential favourite to win the French Open later this month.

Federer, for whom the French Open remains the only Grand Slam tournament he is yet to win, has led the tributes to Nadal, saying: "At his age what he is doing is great and we haven't had a guy doing that for many years.

"It's good for the game because he has a lot of energy. I am looking forward to more battles with him in the future."

Clay-court great Thomas Muster got a close-up view of Nadal last week as he practised with the Spaniard during their respective tournaments in Rome.

Former world number one Muster was preparing to play in the Delta Tour of Champions seniors series in the city.

Muster believes Nadal must not be rushed - but that a French Open triumph can be virtually guaranteed at some point in the future.

Muster said: "Maybe he won't win the French Open this year or next year, but there is going to be a time when he will win the French Open.

"The main thing is he is not waiting for it to come to him - he is coming out with the attitude that he is going to go for it and that is already a very big step."

Jim Courier reached three French Open finals including two successive victories, and he believes Nadal possesses an equally indefatigable spirit which will enable him to succeed.

Courier said: "You have to start with his competitive instincts - he just loves the battle and it doesn't matter if he wins or loses the first set - he comes right back in the second ready to go.

"When you look at the history of the game, players that show themselves to be champions at this early stage of their careers tend to go on to have big careers."

But perhaps the loudest praise came from John McEnroe, who believes Nadal represents the kind of young and exciting figure which the game has been crying out for.

McEnroe is a huge fan of the Spaniard and is convinced he has what it takes to lead the next generation of stars.

McEnroe said: "He is going to be one of the great players - he will end this year as one of the top guys already.

"He loves to play, you can see it, he's so fired up and that's what our sport needs - a guy that loves to be out there. He plays to the crowd and I love seeing that."

allanah
05-13-2005, 07:45 PM
I'm not a big Nadal fan. I admire his talent, his grit and determination. But there's something about watching him play that just leaves me cold and I find myself nitpicking at things like the fact that he looks like a walking Nike billboard and his shouting and fist-pumping kinda grates on my nerves. Not sure why that is.

He is a cracking talent tho.

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 07:53 PM
But there's something about watching him play that just leaves me cold and I find myself nitpicking at things like the fact that he looks like a walking Nike billboard and his shouting and fist-pumping kinda grates on my nerves. Not sure why that is.

Ha ha. I just read this...

Authorities get shirty over Nadal

Chris Bowers in Rome
Sunday May 8, 2005

Observer

Rafael Nadal might be the man to signal the dawn of a new golden era in tennis. However, it is the youngster's choice of clothing which is attracting the most attention in the Italian capital this week.
The 18-year-old Spaniard yesterday won his 16th consecutive match to take him into today's final of the Rome Masters.

The 4-6 6-4 7-5 victory over David Ferrer means Nadal has now won 21 of his past 22 matches, is second only to world number one Roger Federer on this year's results, and is likely to appear in the top five when tomorrow's ranking list comes out. Yet the Spaniard's potential to attract controversy through his on-court apparel has overshadowed his startling progress.

Nadal's clothing provider, Nike, has used him in the past week to play out one of its own battles in public. In his five matches on the Rome clay, Nadal has sported a large 'swoosh' - Nike's tick-like logo - on the front and back of his shirt, and for the first three another on the leg of the plus fours he has helped make fashionable this year.

The size of the logos is clearly illegal - the rules say a player can only wear one logo of a maximum four square inches (three at Grand Slams) or two of two square inches. Nadal's are about six inches in width, so are clearly a violation of the rules.

But not for the first time Nike has thrown down the gauntlet to tennis's authorities. The company claims the three-stripes logo patented and marketed effectively by Adidas also breaches the rules. And Nike has a point. The ATP's rulebook states: 'Clothing designs will not be interpreted as manufacturer's logos and such can be incorporated into the clothing design.'

But Adidas's stripes are a registered trademark, and if any other manufacturer designed a tennis shirt with three stripes down the shoulders and sides, they would probably find the phone ringing from Adidas's lawyers. That effectively makes it a logo, claims Nike, and it therefore wants either permission to use its large logos, or for the existing rule to be enforced for Adidas kit.

Nike's brinkmanship has thrown tennis's governing bodies into a spin. The ATP has let Nadal wear the large logos as 'a short-term interim solution'.

Bill Babcock of the International Tennis Federation said: 'The situation clearly needs addressing, and it is being addressed by us, the ATP, the WTA and the Grand Slams.' The parties normally meet during the second week of the French Open, but a decision seems likely before the championship begins a fortnight tomorrow.

All the talk of his clothing has overshadowed what a phenomenal player Nadal is. Not only does he have immense flair, but with Federer he could well provide the rivalry at the top of the game which tennis has been crying out for since Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe provided such a contrast a quarter of a century ago.

While Federer plays classic, stylish tennis, Nadal epitomises the modern baseline style of heavy topspin and a two-handed backhand. While Federer seems unrufflable on court, Nadal is wildly expressive. And while Federer is the clean-cut boy any parent would be happy for their daughter to bring home, Nadal has the shoulder-length hair and tenacious warrior look of a native American.

In fact, the only thing that is missing from a repeat of the Borg-McEnroe comparison is the edginess that forever led people to expect McEnroe to boil over.

However, the controversy being generated by Nadal's choice of clothing is causing the tennis authorities as much as a headache as McEnroe ever gave any umpire.

Meanwhile, in the semi- finals of the German Open, Justine Henin-Hardenne is one match away from a third straight title after defeating Patty Schnyder 6-0 6-1. The Belgian, who beat Maria Sharapova on Friday, stretched her winning streak on clay to 16 matches.

The 22-year-old has lost just one match since her return from a long lay-off through illness and injury. She is chasing her third title in four events after back-to-back wins at Charleston and Warsaw.

'I played a very solid match and I am very pleased,' she said after progressing in 51 minutes. 'I was going for the corners and making winners and it was very good.'

Henin-Hardenne awaits the winner of the second semi-final between Jelena Jankovic and Nadia Petrova.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

tennis4eva
05-13-2005, 08:40 PM
:bigclap: They're right! Rafa is going to win the French sometime in his career. I think he as a chance to win the AO as well, if he keep improving his serve. :worship: I've never seen any player fight as hard as he does. Except, perhaps Duck when he was younger. Nadal still has the youthful energy going for him; I just hope that he doesn't loose it as he gets older the way Andy did. :sad:

mitalidas
05-13-2005, 08:53 PM
wow, I havent seen so much hype about a player since the hype over Roger
But Roger had won a Slam, in beautiful style, to get that hype

allanah
05-13-2005, 09:02 PM
:bigclap: They're right! Rafa is going to win the French sometime in his career. I think he as a chance to win the AO as well, if he keep improving his serve. :worship: I've never seen any player fight as hard as he does. Except, perhaps Duck when he was younger. Nadal still has the youthful energy going for him; I just hope that he doesn't loose it as he gets older the way Andy did. :sad:

I don't quite agree tennis4eva, that Andy has lost his youthfult enrgy. I think he has made some bad decisions in terms of his coaching staff and Dean Goldfine's mediocrity is being reflected in roddick's play. The talent, and the energy, are both stillthere - I reckon he just needs the right poerson to help him unleash it.

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 09:08 PM
wow, I havent seen so much hype about a player since the hype over Roger
But Roger had won a Slam, in beautiful style, to get that hype
What, Roger was hyped after his win of Sampras in 1991 Wimby...Then thought of as a disappointment after several first round losses...

Nastase
05-13-2005, 09:08 PM
No doubt he's gonna win a slam soon, as tennis4eva said he has to improve his service to get a chance on hard courts against great servers like RF or ARod, his agressive tennis will get him to te top.

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 09:11 PM
I don't quite agree tennis4eva, that Andy has lost his youthfult enrgy. I think he has made some bad decisions in terms of his coaching staff and Dean Goldfine's mediocrity is being reflected in roddick's play. The talent, and the energy, are both stillthere - I reckon he just needs the right poerson to help him unleash it.

I don't know. I always thought Roddick was an overachiever, and has been brought back down to earth. In a way, if Fed weren't around and Roddick was winning everything (more possible in 1993 & 1994), then I would probably continue to rant about the lack of depth in men's tennis as there was in 1992...

But those are just my thoughts. Nice to have a new voice on MTF :wavey:

mitalidas
05-13-2005, 09:11 PM
What, Roger was hyped after his win of Sampras in 1991 Wimby...Then thought of as a disappointment after several first round losses...

you mean 2001

regardless, the printed matter on Roger after defeating pete was nowhere near the amount on Rafa now. Which is understandable, because roger lost the very next match. and did not have a bunch of TMS titles or many other titles

my point remains -- for a player who has gone on a streak and won two TMS titles, and finalled at one, the hype on nadal is enormous. It took Roger's winning a slam to get that much hype

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 09:13 PM
you mean 2001


No, I mean in 1991. Don't you know how long it's take Fed to live up to his potential :p

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 09:15 PM
you mean 2001

regardless, the printed matter on Roger after defeating pete was nowhere near the amount on Rafa now. Which is understandable, because roger lost the very next match. and did not have a bunch of TMS titles or many other titles

my point remains -- for a player who has gone on a streak and won two TMS titles, and finalled at one, the hype on nadal is enormous. It took Roger's winning a slam to get that much hype

See, I still disagree. The watershed of Nadal hype has only been in the last two months. In fact, maybe I'll bump a Classic MTF thread on the hype of Roger...

tennischick
05-13-2005, 09:16 PM
it's interesting that Rogi is also sponsored by Nike but he was not make to wear the oversized logos. they must clearly see Nadal as the flavor of the month. ;)

allanah
05-13-2005, 09:20 PM
thanks TF. :) T'would be even better if the "new voice" could spell :rolleyes: :)

I'd actually call Andy an underachiever because a lot of the criticisms people leveled at him (his only shot is his serve, he has no backhand, he's slow around the court, he can't return etc) are infinitely 'fixable'. In fact his shot-making has greatly improved in the sense that he doesn't have to kill every rally with a huge forehand. He can now come in and volley (well, -ish) and his backhand is consistent, if unspectacular. He's even shed a couple of pounds (tho i didn't think he needed it) and looked more comfortable on clay (or less uncomfortable) than I have ever seen him.

What's missing is the mental hardness. He lacks that killer instinct. That thing that Sampras had. That Federer, Nadal and Hewitt have. when they can be 2 sets down, 2 breaks down and triple matchpoint down and you still think they are going to get out of it.

The talent is there in abundance IMHO.

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 09:24 PM
thanks TF. :) T'would be even better if the "new voice" could spell :rolleyes: :)

I'd actually call Andy an underachiever because a lot of the criticisms people leveled at him (his only shot is his serve, he has no backhand, he's slow around the court, he can't return etc) are infinitely 'fixable'. In fact his shot-making has greatly improved in the sense that he doesn't have to kill every rally with a huge forehand. He can now come in and volley (well, -ish) and his backhand is consistent, if unspectacular. He's even shed a couple of pounds (tho i didn't think he needed it) and looked more comfortable on clay (or less uncomfortable) than I have ever seen him.

What's missing is the mental hardness. He lacks that killer instinct. That thing that Sampras had. That Federer, Nadal and Hewitt have. when they can be 2 sets down, 2 breaks down and triple matchpoint down and you still think they are going to get out of it.

The talent is there in abundance IMHO.
You see, that's the one thing I think Roddick *does* have -- mental stength. I always refer back to the Nably semi at the uSO in 2003...

allanah
05-13-2005, 09:36 PM
Heh, TF. I guess that just goes to show how subjective sport is. For me Andy is not as mentally strong as he needs to be to win aother GS. He doesn't put away lower ranked players clinically enough. Often he'll blitz someone out of the opening set, let his mind wander and then end up either squeaking out the second in a breaker or losing it all together before finishing it in the 3rd.

He's definitely a momentum player - if the momentum goes against him, he can sometimes just stop trying, which I find so disappointing. The semi v Hewitt at this year's AO was a particular case in point :sad:

Worth mentioning I think, that i only criticse him, because I am desperate for him to do well and I think he has all the tools to do so if he can just get his head right. The competition is getting tougher, so so must he.

mitalidas
05-13-2005, 09:50 PM
See, I still disagree. The watershed of Nadal hype has only been in the last two months. In fact, maybe I'll bump a Classic MTF thread on the hype of Roger...

but do you honestly believe that winning two TMS's, and finalling at another, is worthy of this much hype? What is the best he has done at a slam?
I think its fourth round, no?
My impression --we will continue to disagree-- is that as great as his results are, they are not in proportion to the hype

Should he win FO, I will jump on the Nadal bandwagon myself

nermo
05-13-2005, 10:23 PM
well, i think the guy is a real phenomena ..on clay at least..so that all these great players would agree on him..

i liked what was said about young players starting careers with willing to win ..so they turn out to be big winners as they get older..

and thats usually true..except for a few cases..ofcourse,
but i truely think that some ppl are born to be winners ..Nadal seems to be one big winner with that talent and fearless heart..

David Kenzie
05-13-2005, 10:36 PM
What is the best he has done at a slam?
I think its fourth round, no?

He has never played Roland Garros, that's why.

Tennis Fool
05-13-2005, 11:02 PM
but do you honestly believe that winning two TMS's, and finalling at another, is worthy of this much hype? What is the best he has done at a slam?
I think its fourth round, no?
My impression --we will continue to disagree-- is that as great as his results are, they are not in proportion to the hype

Should he win FO, I will jump on the Nadal bandwagon myself
The Search Engine keeps getting disabled, so I will direct you to this typical pre-Slam article on Fed...

Rediff.com


Federer hopes to lose enigma tag
June 16, 2003 15:16 IST

Roger Federer's defeat of Pete Sampras in the Wimbledon fourth round two years ago seemed certain to set the Swiss man on the road to grand slam glory.
But despite possessing a bundle of talent, Federer has become the enigma of the tour, winning a succession of tournaments only to fail when it comes to the biggest stages.

It may seem harsh to criticise a player who has climbed to number five in the world rankings and who crushed German Nicolas Kiefer 6-1 6-3 in the Halle Open final on Sunday.

But in seven grand slam events since the victory over Sampras, Federer has never gone beyond the fourth round and he has lost in the first round on three occasions.

Federer took heart from his Halle triumph, his first grasscourt title, describing it as "the perfect preparation for Wimbledon".

But now he must carry the momentum of the Halle win with him to London next week, after a few days' rest at home.

Last year, after entering Wimbledon as one of the favourites, Federer was blown off court in the first round by big-serving Croat Mario Ancic.

IDEAL CANDIDATE

His mental strength was again called into question at the French Open last month when, despite being seeded fifth, he lost in the first round to Peruvian Luis Horna, who had never won a grand slam match before.

"He didn't play a bad match and I didn't play a good match, the one definitely helps the other, you know?" was all Federer said in Paris.

With his classic serve-and-volley game, allied to a superb backhand and good speed around the court, Federer would seem an ideal candidate to succeed at Wimbledon, if he can survive the opening round.

"I prefer the second and third rounds to the first round because by then you are used to the court and the conditions," he said. "And I have a pretty good record in finals.

"But there's a lot of work to be done. I want to serve and volley better, hit more aces, and I have to feel more comfortable on grass."

In Halle, Federer varied his game well, testing his baseline game as well as his serve-and-volley skills.

"I wanted to get in a groove from the baseline just in case I play someone who plays like that," he said.

ELITE BAND

"At Wimbledon I want to be more aggressive than this week. I will have to pick the right shots to come in on.

"I play my best tennis when I'm playing aggressively," he added after beating Kiefer.

Halle was Federer's fourth title this year and he is on course to outdo his career-best performance in 2002, when he won 58 of his 80 singles matches.

Sunday's win allowed him to join the elite band of active players who have won on all four surfaces -- grass, clay, hardcourt and indoors.

"With my ranking and my game, the way I'm playing, I know I can win a lot of tournaments," Federer said.

Whether one of those tournaments is a grand slam remains to be seen.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:06 AM
but this article does not hype Roger!!!!
It talks about him being a choker ("only to fail when it comes to the biggest stages"), and not able to capitalize ("His mental strength was again called into question at the French Open last month"), and the article ends in doubt
("Whether one of those tournaments is a grand slam remains to be seen")

This is not the kind of hype that Nadal has been getting

Nadal has been earmarked to win a slam that he has never contested before


The Search Engine keeps getting disabled, so I will direct you to this typical pre-Slam article on Fed...

Rediff.com


Federer hopes to lose enigma tag
June 16, 2003 15:16 IST

Roger Federer's defeat of Pete Sampras in the Wimbledon fourth round two years ago seemed certain to set the Swiss man on the road to grand slam glory.
But despite possessing a bundle of talent, Federer has become the enigma of the tour, winning a succession of tournaments only to fail when it comes to the biggest stages.

It may seem harsh to criticise a player who has climbed to number five in the world rankings and who crushed German Nicolas Kiefer 6-1 6-3 in the Halle Open final on Sunday.

But in seven grand slam events since the victory over Sampras, Federer has never gone beyond the fourth round and he has lost in the first round on three occasions.

Federer took heart from his Halle triumph, his first grasscourt title, describing it as "the perfect preparation for Wimbledon".

But now he must carry the momentum of the Halle win with him to London next week, after a few days' rest at home.

Last year, after entering Wimbledon as one of the favourites, Federer was blown off court in the first round by big-serving Croat Mario Ancic.

IDEAL CANDIDATE

His mental strength was again called into question at the French Open last month when, despite being seeded fifth, he lost in the first round to Peruvian Luis Horna, who had never won a grand slam match before.

"He didn't play a bad match and I didn't play a good match, the one definitely helps the other, you know?" was all Federer said in Paris.

With his classic serve-and-volley game, allied to a superb backhand and good speed around the court, Federer would seem an ideal candidate to succeed at Wimbledon, if he can survive the opening round.

"I prefer the second and third rounds to the first round because by then you are used to the court and the conditions," he said. "And I have a pretty good record in finals.

"But there's a lot of work to be done. I want to serve and volley better, hit more aces, and I have to feel more comfortable on grass."

In Halle, Federer varied his game well, testing his baseline game as well as his serve-and-volley skills.

"I wanted to get in a groove from the baseline just in case I play someone who plays like that," he said.

ELITE BAND

"At Wimbledon I want to be more aggressive than this week. I will have to pick the right shots to come in on.

"I play my best tennis when I'm playing aggressively," he added after beating Kiefer.

Halle was Federer's fourth title this year and he is on course to outdo his career-best performance in 2002, when he won 58 of his 80 singles matches.

Sunday's win allowed him to join the elite band of active players who have won on all four surfaces -- grass, clay, hardcourt and indoors.

"With my ranking and my game, the way I'm playing, I know I can win a lot of tournaments," Federer said.

Whether one of those tournaments is a grand slam remains to be seen.

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 01:32 AM
but do you honestly believe that winning two TMS's, and finalling at another, is worthy of this much hype? What is the best he has done at a slam?


Well, normally not, but when the winner of successive TMS titles is an 18 year old kid it would almost be a crime if there weren't much hype, and this is coming from someone who refuses to admire Nadal's tennis.

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 01:34 AM
Nadal has been earmarked to win a slam that he has never contested before
So was Fed before FO 2003.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:37 AM
you mean 2001

regardless, the printed matter on Roger after defeating pete was nowhere near the amount on Rafa now. Which is understandable, because roger lost the very next match. and did not have a bunch of TMS titles or many other titles

my point remains -- for a player who has gone on a streak and won two TMS titles, and finalled at one, the hype on nadal is enormous. It took Roger's winning a slam to get that much hype

Complete and total BS. Federer was touted as a future all-time great long before he ever won a slam.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:37 AM
it's interesting that Rogi is also sponsored by Nike but he was not make to wear the oversized logos. they must clearly see Nadal as the flavor of the month. ;)

He wasn't playing that week anyways, unless I missed something.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:39 AM
See, I still disagree. The watershed of Nadal hype has only been in the last two months. In fact, maybe I'll bump a Classic MTF thread on the hype of Roger...

Indeed.

Oh the hilarity at hearing that Federer wasn't hyped. Federer was so hyped that it called for GoDom creating a "Federer is overrated" thread before he lost to Ancic at Wimbledon one year.

Nadal is being hyped recently because he's doing something that only a handful of guys his age has. He was somewhat hyped when he came on tour because he ass-smacked two Roland Garros champions on clay when he was 16 - within his first 10 ATP matches!

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:43 AM
but do you honestly believe that winning two TMS's, and finalling at another, is worthy of this much hype? What is the best he has done at a slam?
I think its fourth round, no?
My impression --we will continue to disagree-- is that as great as his results are, they are not in proportion to the hype

Hype is rarely "proportional" with results. It most certainly wasn't for Federer, who was HEAVILY hyped as a teenager. If he wasn't getting as much ink as Nadal that would be because it took him longer to do the things that Nadal has already done (and don't take that the long way - it took Fed a while to fulfill his potential, which I assume he has more of than Nadal). The press likes prodigies. Welcome to earth, yo ;) Furthermore, Nadal has a very expressive personality. He's marketable. That's not to say that Fed isn't, but they have very different personalities on court.

Should he win FO, I will jump on the Nadal bandwagon myself

For the love of God, please don't. I ran out of foot room two months ago.

connectolove
05-14-2005, 01:47 AM
The way I see it is that behind Nadal's hype there is a fascination with his persona aside from tennis. He is who most people'd like to be: charismatic, good looking, sexy, affectionate, spontaneous, and belongs to a really nice family. Society wants and needs guys like this, uncomplicated men that fight when they have to and are loving when they have to too.

I love the guy for all these reasons and on top of everything, he is an incredible tennis player. In a way, we all want him to succeed.

Sjengster
05-14-2005, 01:50 AM
So was Fed before FO 2003.

"Never contested" literally means "never played", TF - Federer had played Wimbledon before, right?

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 01:51 AM
In a way, we all want him to succeed.

Hey, speak for yourself! ;)

He does make things more interesting though

DanEd
05-14-2005, 01:53 AM
The way I see it is that behind Nadal's hype there is a fascination with his persona aside from tennis. He is who most people'd like to be: charismatic, good looking, sexy, affectionate, spontaneous, and belongs to a really nice family. Society wants and needs guys like this, uncomplicated men that fight when they have to and are loving when they have to too.

I love the guy for all these reasons and on top of everything, he is an incredible tennis player. In a way, we all want him to succeed.


you miss rich and national heroe.

jacobhiggins
05-14-2005, 01:54 AM
I think it's imporatant to note, Federer was not has hyped as Nadal or Roddick. He was never in the spotlight until he beat Sampras and started winning slams. He earned the respect and admiration, it wasn't because of his good looks or popularity. Nadal is a very good player already and has a lot more hype then Federer ever had at this stage in his career!

kabuki
05-14-2005, 01:54 AM
:drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive: :drive:

Bandwagon!!!

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 01:57 AM
Nadal is a very good player already and has a lot more hype then Federer ever had at this stage in his career!

No he hasn't, it's just that it took Federer a few more years to get to this stage of his career

Sjengster
05-14-2005, 01:57 AM
Out of interest, how exactly does one define a bandwagon? Is it composed of those who suddenly become fans of a player because they're successful, or is it composed of those who suddenly start to hype a player and talk about them in glowing terms, without becoming a fan of them, because they're successful? If the latter is true, then I think virtually everyone will be on the Nadal bandwagon before long, and you can hardly blame 'em provided the hype isn't disproportionate to the results.

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 01:59 AM
Out of interest, how exactly does one define a bandwagon? Is it composed of those who suddenly become fans of a player because they're successful.

I think this is it, not sure though :shrug:

Skyward
05-14-2005, 02:00 AM
. He is who most people'd like to be: charismatic, good looking, sexy, affectionate, spontaneous.

Are you talking about Safin?

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 02:08 AM
Nadal is a very good player already and has a lot more hype then Federer ever had at this stage in his career!
:scratch: Fed was 19 going on 20 when he bumped off Sampras at Wimbledon. Nadal is a year younger and bumped off the #1 during a Masters last year when he was 17. Nadal just has mutured faster and has the results faster. He should be compared to Chang, Agassi and Becker more than Roger.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:08 AM
I think it's imporatant to note, Federer was not has hyped as Nadal or Roddick.

Again, this is absolute rubbish (although it's not entirely fair to compare him to Roddick, because Roddick is an American and the American press is much "louder" where I live than any other press (even our own :p). Federer was hyped to be a future great LOOONNNG before he won a slam. Did y'all just start following tennis yesterday? :confused:

He was never in the spotlight until he beat Sampras and started winning slams.

Rubbish. Federer was touted to take Sampras out at Wimbledon that year. It was a massive breakthrough but it wasn't a startling surprise. Again - did y'all jsut start following tennis yesterday? This is absurd!

Nadal, btw, beat two RG champs in his first ten matches on tour. He "earned" his hype as much as Federer.... more so, actually.

He earned the respect and admiration, it wasn't because of his good looks or popularity. Nadal is a very good player already and has a lot more hype then Federer ever had at this stage in his career!

Nadal has earned it too - probably even more so than Fed had, results wise. Fed was hyped on his game before he had the results. Nadal has always had the results to hype.

Quit being a Fed-twat.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:10 AM
No he hasn't, it's just that it took Federer a few more years to get to this stage of his career

Ah, a voice of reason amidst the absurdity.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:12 AM
Are you talking about Safin?
No. If we were talking about Safin we'd be sure to throw in "whiney and petulant"

Skyward
05-14-2005, 02:15 AM
No. If we were talking about Safin we'd be sure to throw in "whiney and petulant"

We"ll see what happens when Nadal reaches the ancient age of 25.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:18 AM
We"ll see what happens when Nadal reaches the ancient age of 25.
Being 24 hasn't made Federer whiney and petulant, so I don't see why it should for Nadal. Ferrero is fairly whiney and petulant... but he's always been that way. So this supports my case ;)

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 02:18 AM
We"ll see what happens when Nadal reaches the ancient age of 25.
No, that's Gasquet. Will he become more Federer-like or more McEnroe like? He's already won a Slam and been arrested in the same year :eek:

Sjengster
05-14-2005, 02:21 AM
Being 24 hasn't made Federer whiney and petulant

We don't know that yet. ;)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:24 AM
We don't know that yet. ;)
Ah, my mistake. There is still time :scared:

Sjengster
05-14-2005, 02:27 AM
Yes indeed, come August 8 this year, the new Roger Groucherer may well be upon us.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:28 AM
We can only hope.

Sjengster
05-14-2005, 02:34 AM
Well, you can; personally I hope that in a year's time we're not going to be seeing threads discussing Federer's bratty behaviour and filled with people saying, "Ah, typical Roger! You either accept him or you don't...", etc. ;)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:41 AM
Well, you can; personally I hope that in a year's time we're not going to be seeing threads discussing Federer's bratty behaviour and filled with people saying, "Ah, typical Roger! You either accept him or you don't...", etc. ;)
I am inclined to agree. I have enough trouble controlling my gag reflex over the Safin threads.

jacobhiggins
05-14-2005, 03:31 AM
Federer was grudgingly acceppted by everybody unlike the pretty boys and the teen idols! There was more doubt and less fan fair for Federer then a lot of the current top players. Nadal is a teen idol and in all honesty a lot of his fans are not tennis fans. He IS being HYPED because of that. I'm not saying he is not good, and does not deserve the hype based on his TENNIS SKILLS, but he has a FARRRRRRRRRRRR easier road plowed for him then Federer ever had, that's what I was trying to say! It won't help him win matches but like Roddick he will be on every tv channel, in commericals, adored by everybody. And that does help you with your tennis career. It can ruin you as well though.

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 03:56 AM
I don't remember Federer being grudgingly accepted. I remember the sports writers in the know in the US rhapsodizing about his "beautiful" tennis for a while before he won his GS. His game iirc was fawned over much more than Nadal's.

I do agree that Nadal may be more embraced by non-ususal-tennis fans in the US- if it is possible for Americans to like a non-native-English speaking male player. (Which is becoming increasingly hard unfortanately). The main reason for this is because Nadal tends to emote more on court and seems to have more enthused than Federer did when he was getting in the zone to win his first GS. (This is not meant as a diss to Roger- I love Federer and his sublime being in the zone. I also like Natal's enthusiasm as well.) I have always thought that Federer has gotten a short end of the stick in regards to US hype- but that does not mean that I want the short end to be extended to all of the players.

But I do think that Nadal deserves praise in the media. Since he has been consistantly injury free he has won a huge Davis Cup match, took Hewitt to 5 set match in the 4th round of the Aussie Open, did excellent on the hard courts at Miami, reached 3 MC finals in a row, won 5 titles in 2005, won three finals in a row, and has won every clay final he has ever played. I think that deserves props. And I will say that I think he seems to be a very nice kid who has not asked for the hype so I am not going to besmirch him for it.

And as an American who has waited and waited for the US to cover a non-US male player like they do some of the ladies or like they did Boris 15 years ago there is no way that I am going to begrudge any "buzz" that a male foreign player can get here in the States. In fact, I will raise my hands to the heavens and thank ye mighty Jeebus for getting some non-xenophobic men's tennis press coverage here.

And the way Gasquet is playing maybe soon we'll even get a Frenchie in the men's tennis buzz bin here as well. And to me that is a good thing. Two young euro players with buzz here in the states? Great!

Skyward
05-14-2005, 04:23 AM
I don't remember Federer being grudgingly accepted. I remember the sports writers in the know in the US rhapsodizing about his "beautiful" tennis for a while before he won his GS. His game iirc was fawned over much more than Nadal's.



To be honest, I don't remember anything about Federer in the US press till February 2001 when he singlehandedly beat US DC team. His game was pretty good and deserved the praise, his erratic results did not.

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 04:28 AM
To be honest, I don't remember anything about Federer in the US press till February 2001 when he singlehandedly beat US DC team. His game was pretty good and deserved the praise, his erratic results did not


Yes, but that was 2.4 years or so before he won his first GS.

And I do think it will be feasible for Nadal to get a GS title within the next 2.4 years. And his results have become pretty darn steady on clay and I imagine that they will be becoming steadier on other surfaces.

I'm not trying to bash Federer in any way at all. I'm just trying to say that Nadal's praise maybe shouldn't be seen as a bunch of hype when others were not praised before. Because they were praised, maybe not with the same circumstances, but there was still praise.

Nadal's is a bit more than I remember for Roger- but Roger did indeed have praise before his Wimbledon win. The writers could smell his potential - the consitancy is what was lacking (the Gasquet situtation a few months ago kind of rings familiar to that.)

But I do think it is fun to watch someone (Nadal) really getting into their potential in a span of 6 months (thats TTC!) It is good for the sport here for there to be enthusiasm for a player who doesn't have a US passport.

Skyward
05-14-2005, 04:46 AM
Yes, but that was 2.5 years before he won his first GS.

I'm sure if he had beaten Spanish DC team , and Ivanisevic/ Rafter/Henman instead of Sampras at Wimbledon, the US press wouldn't have noticed him at all.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 07:39 AM
I'm sure if he had beaten Spanish DC team , and Ivanisevic/ Rafter/Henman instead of Sampras at Wimbledon, the US press wouldn't have noticed him at all.
Duh.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 07:43 AM
Federer was grudgingly acceppted by everybody unlike the pretty boys and the teen idols!

WTF?

There was more doubt and less fan fair for Federer then a lot of the current top players.
Sure - because he was INCONSISTENT! Despite that he was hyped to the heavens!

Nadal is a teen idol and in all honesty a lot of his fans are not tennis fans.

Really? Who? Where?

He IS being HYPED because of that.

Wrong. There was no hype before results.

This is quite possible the most retarded thread I have ever read.

What Nadal has done at 18 is fucking SPECIAL. If you don't like, too fucking bad. But so few this age before him have been this good that it's worthy of hype. Quit talking out your assholes and trying to excuse that!

I'm not saying he is not good, and does not deserve the hype based on his TENNIS SKILLS,

COMPLETE horseshit. Nadal is the second best player so far, points wise this year. He also produced when he was fucking 16! Speak of what you know - not out your ass. Thanks :)

This thread is so full of stupidity that it's making my head explode. Good LORD!


but he has a FARRRRRRRRRRRR easier road plowed for him then Federer ever had, that's what I was trying to say!

Clarify this. Thanks :)

It won't help him win matches but like Roddick he will be on every tv channel, in commericals, adored by everybody. And that does help you with your tennis career. It can ruin you as well though.

At last check, he didn't need help winning matches this year.

You can sit down now.

jacobhiggins
05-14-2005, 07:54 AM
Guys, is Chloe crazy? She seems a little loopy lol, calm down girl, i'm just saying it how I see it! I'm not bashing Nadal, I think he has earned hype because of his tennis skills, the teenage girls probablly don't even care about the score though!

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 07:58 AM
Guys, is Chloe crazy? She seems a little loopy lol, calm down girl, i'm just saying it how I see it!

I'm plenty loopy, but I don't need to calm down. You are amusing the shit out of me ;) I needed something since my roomates aren't up :o

I'm not bashing Nadal,

It would be fine if you were...

I think he has earned hype because of his tennis skills,

A COMPLETE contradiction of your last post on the matter.

the teenage girls probablly don't even care about the score though!

1) Are they the ones writing the articles? Let me field that one for you: No!

2) They aren't all teenagers.

connectolove
05-14-2005, 08:30 AM
posted by Skyward "Are you talking about Safin?"

Unfortunately Safin is a drama queen and Nadal is not. Also, Nadal was taken to a tennis club at the age of 4 and he went back, on his own, the next day, and the next... he really enjoyed it and wanted to do it. :cool:

Safin always wanted to be a soccer player, he was FORCED to stop playing soccer to pick up a racket. Perhaps he has issues with it. :mad:

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 08:50 AM
I ripped this from vamosrafael.com.. it was ripped from the atp site:



PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2005 8:23 am Post subject: Reply with quote
i know this doesn't really belong here.. i just didn't know where else to put it Laughing

it's from the ATP Insider, week of May 9

->> – NADALMANIA! … To say RAFAEL NADAL is on a hot streak would be a bit of an understatement. In fact, the soon-to-be 19-year-old Spaniard heads to Roland Garros with a 17-match winning streak, the longest streak heading into Paris since Thomas Muster's 23-match winning streak in 1995. Muster won Roland Garros that year. With five titles in 2005, including two in the past month at ATP MASTERS Series events, Nadal's ranking has risen from No. 51 to start the year to No. 5 this week. His popularity has risen as fast as his ranking, and for the month of April, Nadal was the most searched player on ATPtennis.com, with over 150,000 page impressions, part of the record breaking 22.4 million page impressions recorded for the ATP's official site during April.

:banana:

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 08:53 AM
Another useless stat:

Rafael Nadal becomes just the 16th player to win at least five titles as a teenager... 10 of them went on to become the world number-one.

If I may say so myself- I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE HYPE! WHY! WHY?! It's so uncalled for!!!!

(do I sound convincingly moronic? I tried)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:35 PM
(do I sound convincingly moronic? I tried)

you didn't have to try

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 12:37 PM
Untrue. And really, you can do better than that. Or can you?

Don't hate on me because I expose absolute stupidity for what it is ;)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:39 PM
Another useless stat:

Rafael Nadal becomes just the 16th player to win at least five titles as a teenager... 10 of them went on to become the world number-one.



those players include the following .... he could have as illustrious a career as them :) :angel:

Andrei Medvedev.........8
Michael Chang............6
Jimmy Arias................5
Yannick Noah..............5
Guill. Perez-Roldan......5

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:40 PM
Untrue. And really, you can do better than that. Or can you?

Don't hate on me because I expose absolute stupidity for what it is ;)

oh a backlash.... caught you on a silly statement and you didn't like it i see

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 12:48 PM
those players include the following .... he could have as illustrious a career as them :) :angel:

Andrei Medvedev.........8
Michael Chang............6
Jimmy Arias................5
Yannick Noah..............5
Guill. Perez-Roldan......5

What would be wrong with that? You got a problem with those guys? :)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 12:49 PM
oh a backlash.... caught you on a silly statement and you didn't like it i see
You didn't catch me in a silly statement, actually. If you had I'd be happy to laugh at myself. The fact is that a lot of posts in this thread are the most fucking absurd things I have ever read on this board - and are clearly coming from "new" tennis fans. If you can't see that, then it's no wonder that you can't understand my point.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:50 PM
What would be wrong with that? You got a problem with those guys? :)

No, I think everyone remembers their names just as well as they remember agassi's and mcenroe's :)

Rafa would be indeed privileged to follow in their footsteps. That's why I said.... as illustrious a career as them :angel:

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 12:52 PM
No, I think everyone remembers their names just as well as they remember agassi's and mcenroe's :)

Rafa would be indeed privileged to follow in their footsteps. That's why I said.... as illustrious a career as them :angel:
I highly doubt that is why you were saying it, but sure.

This reminds me of the time that somebody tried to suggest that Monfils or Gasquet might just be the "next Grosjean"... as if that was supposed to be insulting. 99.9999% of ATP players would love that kind of career.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:52 PM
You didn't catch me in a silly statement, actually. If you had I'd be happy to laugh at myself. The fact is that a lot of posts in this thread are the most fucking absurd things I have ever read on this board - and are clearly coming from "new" tennis fans. If you can't see that, then it's no wonder that you can't understand my point.

Actually, I believe I did catch you in a silly statment. You said you had had to try to be convincingly stupid, and I thought you didn't have to try.

These statemetns may be fucking absurd to you, but not to the ones who wrote them. If you can't see that, you're missing the point.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 12:54 PM
Actually, I believe I did catch you in a silly statment. You said you had had to try to be convincingly stupid, and I thought you didn't have to try.

No. You're still wrong. It was not a silly statement. My points in this thread have not been stupid and I'm not even close to stupid (you wish)... therefore there was nothing silly at all about what was said. Insult me all you wish, but you can do a LOT better than that.

These statemetns may be fucking absurd to you, but not to the ones who wrote them. If you can't see that, you're missing the point.

They are fucking absurd for all the reasons that I said. I'm not missing the point at all. The point is merely wrong.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 12:56 PM
No. You're still wrong. It was not a silly statement. My points in this thread have not been stupid and I'm not even close to stupid (you wish)... therefore there was nothing silly at all about what was said. Insult me all you wish, but you can do a LOT better than that.
They are fucking absurd for all the reasons that I said. I'm not missing the point at all. The point is merely wrong


The statements are as fucking absurd (an opinion of yours) as your statements are silly (an opinion of mine).

And my saying that you're making a silly statement is as much an insult to you, as your saying that my (and others') statements on this are fucking absurd. Your point is wrong. They are fucking un-absurd.
Insult me all your wish, but you might be able to do far better than that yourself.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:06 PM
The statements are as fucking absurd (an opinion of yours) as your statements are silly (an opinion of mine).

And my saying that you're making a silly statement is as much an insult to you, as your saying that my (and others') statements on this are fucking absurd. Your point is wrong. They are fucking un-absurd.
Insult me all your wish, but you might be able to do far better than that yourself.
I'm not insulted. I merely said that you were being insulting. There is a difference ;)

You haven't ripped my point apart. Absolutely nothing of them.You've offered nothing. All you've said is "teehee, you silly". I have ripped the fucking absurd points a new asshole in several points.

The only people who think Federer was not hyped to the high heavens are completely full of shit and probably weren't tennis fans when he was on the rise. That or they have very unfortunate memories and are sorry, sorry souls who are just looking for something to bitch about Nadal over,

Your turn! Try ripping my point apart instead of just calling it something it's not.

I dare you!

Exodus
05-14-2005, 01:08 PM
People will forget about Nadal as soon as the clayseason is over!!!

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:10 PM
People will forget about Nadal as soon as the clayseason is over!!!
EXACTLY. Because nobody was talking about him before that.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:12 PM
I'm not insulted. I merely said that you were being insulting. There is a difference ;)

You haven't ripped my point apart. Absolutely nothing of them.You've offered nothing. All you've said is "teehee, you silly". I have ripped the fucking absurd points a new asshole in several points.

The only people who think Federer was not hyped to the high heavens are completely full of shit and probably weren't tennis fans when he was on the rise. That or they have very unfortunate memories and are sorry, sorry souls who are just looking for something to bitch about Nadal over,

Your turn! Try ripping my point apart instead of just calling it something it's not.

I dare you!

I did offer something. I said your having to try to be stupid is not necessary, it comes much more naturally. You couldn't take it as a joke, and decided to start describing opinions on the forum as fucking absurd. It doesn't make your statement correct, its just your fucking opinion! (and in my opinion, a stupid one) :wavey:

The only people who think Nadal is over-hyped, think he is hyped disproportionately to his accomplishments. No one believes that he shouldn't be hyped at all --he has reached 3 consecutive Masters finals. I said I would jump on the Nadal bandwagon the minute he proved himself on the biggest stage, the Slams. It is my opinion therefore that the hype as of now is disproportionate.

Federer's hype really began when he won W in 2003. Not when he won the masters title in Hamburg in 2002!!!!

loveit
05-14-2005, 01:13 PM
People will forget about Nadal as soon as the clayseason is over!!!


I totally agree with you Exodus. Nadal has only proven basically proven himself on clay

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:14 PM
People will forget about Nadal as soon as the clayseason is over!!!

I don't think they've waited that long even :D
This week already in Hamburg the news has been focussed on others....

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 01:15 PM
Federer's hype really began when he won W in 2003. Not when he won the masters title in Hamburg in 2002!!!!

Just because the US realised later than everyone about Federer's talent doesn't mean he wasn't hyped.

He was hyped in 2001 as a player of huge promise and it really got going after he beat Sampras, elsewhere in the tennis world.

Nacho
05-14-2005, 01:15 PM
and people will remember him as soon as the grass season starts :)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:20 PM
Just because the US realised later than everyone about Federer's talent doesn't mean he wasn't hyped.

He was hyped in 2001 as a player of huge promise and it really got going after he beat Sampras, elsewhere in the tennis world.

I lived in the UK till 2003 (and still work there part of the year) so I did see what was written about him and spoken about him. But was it as severe as the talk on Nadal now? I don't ever remember that. I remember many commentators talking about how beautiful his game was, but it was most certainly not mentioned at the drop of a hat "will win a slam this year, will be number 1 soon".

Yesterday someone posted a piece on him that was written just weeks before Wimbledon 2003. And even that went on about his mental fortitude (meaning, lack of it) and inability to perform on the biggest stages. This sounds very different to what is written about Nadal a few weeks before the FO. My opinion remains that Nadal's accomplishments as huge as they are, are disproportionate to the hype. How has he done in his best slam performance? 4th round? less?

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:20 PM
I did offer something. I said your having to try to be stupid is not necessary, it comes much more naturally. You couldn't take it as a joke, and decided to start describing opinions on the forum as fucking absurd. It doesn't make your statement correct, its just your fucking opinion! (and in my opinion, a stupid one) :wavey:

1) I didn't realize you were joking.
2) I described opinions of the forum as "fucking absurd" long before you said that. Get the sequence straight.

The only people who think Nadal is over-hyped, think he is hyped disproportionately to his accomplishments.

Untrue. You do not speak for everybody. Lot's of people are just absurd and think he would be "overhyped" even if he won Wimbledon 600 times. It's swell that you think you aren't one of those people - but those people exist. Here. On this board.

"Hype" usually is "dispropotional to accomplishments", btw. That's why it's called "hype". Because it's excessive.

No one believes that he shouldn't be hyped at all

Again.. there are some people who do think that ;) Swell that you don't, though.

--he has reached 3 consecutive Masters finals. I said I would jump on the Nadal bandwagon the minute he proved himself on the biggest stage, the Slams.

Is that how long you waited before rooting for Fed? :)

It is my opinion therefore that the hype as of now is disproportionate.

As I said, it always is. But as far as "hype" goes, it's totalyl called for and it's not hard to understand why it's happening.

Federer's hype really began when he won W in 2003. Not when he won the masters title in Hamburg in 2002!!!!

This could not POSSIBLY be more wrong. Did you watch tennis before that?

As i said before - Federer was SO hyped that people were creating "Federer is overrated!" threads before he won a slam.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:23 PM
I don't think they've waited that long even :D
This week already in Hamburg the news has been focussed on others....
Yeah. That's why we have a thread with an article about him. During Hamburg. Which he's not playing.

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 01:24 PM
I lived in the UK till 2003 (and still work there part of the year) so I did see what was written about him and spoken about him. But was it as severe as the talk on Nadal now? I don't ever remember that. I remember many commentators talking about how beautiful his game was, but it was most certainly not mentioned at the drop of a hat "will win a slam this year, will be number 1 soon".

Well considering they said look out for this player with immense promise, talent and a future # 1 when he was so young that to me is hype and yes there were people going on about how overrated Federer was and I dealt with them regularly, now the Federer fawning is the problem.

You don't remember it, but I definitely do.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:24 PM
I lived in the UK till 2003 (and still work there part of the year) so I did see what was written about him and spoken about him. But was it as severe as the talk on Nadal now? I don't ever remember that. I remember many commentators talking about how beautiful his game was, but it was most certainly not mentioned at the drop of a hat "will win a slam this year, will be number 1 soon".

Yesterday someone posted a piece on him that was written just weeks before Wimbledon 2003. And even that went on about his mental fortitude (meaning, lack of it) and inability to perform on the biggest stages. This sounds very different to what is written about Nadal a few weeks before the FO. My opinion remains that Nadal's accomplishments as huge as they are, are disproportionate to the hype. How has he done in his best slam performance? 4th round? less?

Federer was inconsistent. That's why there was talk about his mental fortitude, which you do not see with Nadal.

Where exactly are you struggling with this? :shrug:

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:32 PM
1) I didn't realize you were joking.
2) I described opinions of the forum as "fucking absurd" long before you said that. Get the sequence straight.



Untrue. You do not speak for everybody. Lot's of people are just absurd and think he would be "overhyped" even if he won Wimbledon 600 times. It's swell that you think you aren't one of those people - but those people exist. Here. On this board.

"Hype" usually is "dispropotional to accomplishments", btw. That's why it's called "hype". Because it's excessive.



Again.. there are some people who do think that ;) Swell that you don't, though.



Is that how long you waited before rooting for Fed? :)



As I said, it always is. But as far as "hype" goes, it's totalyl called for and it's not hard to understand why it's happening.



This could not POSSIBLY be more wrong. Did you watch tennis before that?

As i said before - Federer was SO hyped that people were creating "Federer is overrated!" threads before he won a slam.

Yeah, and I am saying that even given that hype is always an exaggeration of expectations, the hype on Nadal is still not in line with his accomplishments. He is the favourite in a tourney he hasn't played and his best slam performance is not fascinating and he hasn't really proved himself on carpet or grass. So, the projection to be an imminent #1 is to me out of line. It remains my opinion that the hype is disproportionate --just as it remains your opinion that its not.


This could not POSSIBLY be more wrong. Did you watch tennis before that?

As i said before - Federer was SO hyped that people were creating "Federer is overrated!" threads before he won a slam..

I did watch Tennis before that. Did you read anything about tennis before that?

Take a look at the print before that- -- the hype was on the beauty of his game, and how complete a player he was. Not on his becoming World #1. I posted just before this, that a week before Wimbledon articles were still lamenting his lack of mental fortitude

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:34 PM
Federer was inconsistent. That's why there was talk about his mental fortitude, which you do not see with Nadal.

Where exactly are you struggling with this? :shrug:
I'm not struggling. Where exactly are you struggling to get my point? :rolleyes: Really, its not that hard : It is my opinion that the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments.

Just as Federer was inconsistent, leading to questions about his mental fortitude, it should be argued that Nadal does not save his best performance for the slams and should thus lead to questions about his being the favourite in a slam (let alone one he hasn't played before)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:38 PM
I'm not struggling. Where exactly are you struggling to get my point? :rolleyes: Really, its not that hard : It is my opinion that the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments.

Um, yes. And I addressed that particular point in some detail in a previous post. At least I know who isn't reading ;)

Just as Federer was inconsistent, leading to questions about his mental fortitude, it should be argued that Nadal does not save his best performance for the slams and should thus lead to questions about his being the favourite in a slam (let alone one he hasn't played before)

It should be argued that Nadal does not save his best performance for slams? Based on what, exactly? This is an argument that makes no sense to me. He was fantastic in Australia. Yes he lost in the 4th round, but he lost to one of the best hardcourters.

Also, there have been many questions about his playing RG for the first time and that posing a bit of a question. However, since not many people go into RG having won MC-Barca-Rome, there will be excitement generated either way.

Just admit it - you want to nitpick over Nadal and this is all you've got. And it's not much :)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:40 PM
Well considering they said look out for this player with immense promise, talent and a future # 1 when he was so young that to me is hype and yes there were people going on about how overrated Federer was and I dealt with them regularly, now the Federer fawning is the problem.

You don't remember it, but I definitely do.

Well you might not remember (I certainly do) is that when there was all this talk on Federer, there was also a lot of talk about Marat, Hewitt and Roddick. And that made sense, because some had proven themselves and others were winning against top players. Federer was definitely not singled out as being the dominant player he has become --he was one amongst a small group of players heralded for the future.

Last year when Coria went on his incredible run, was there as much hype about him becoming #1 about him as there is now about Nadal? He reached 3 Masters finals and won one and had an amazing streak on clay, too. That's why I say the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments. Some hype is reasonable --it is of my opinion that it is out of line at this moment (until the second Sunday in Paris)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:43 PM
Yeah, and I am saying that even given that hype is always an exaggeration of expectations, the hype on Nadal is still not in line with his accomplishments.

Uh huh.

So just how much hype would be appropriated to you? Afterall, people who are 18 do what Nadal has done all the time, right?

He is the favourite in a tourney he hasn't played and his best slam performance is not fascinating and he hasn't really proved himself on carpet or grass. So, the projection to be an imminent #1 is to me out of line. It remains my opinion that the hype is disproportionate --just as it remains your opinion that its not.

I did not say it wasn't disproportionate. In fact, I said the opposite: that hype ALWAYS is. However, relative to how hype is... the Nadal stuff is no big deal. Again... it's nice to know who bothers to read ;)

I did watch Tennis before that. Did you read anything about tennis before that?

I've been reading boards since 2000 and posting on them since 2001. Perhaps this is why I remember the Fed hype quite fondly and you don't? :) Or maybe it's because you're a bit of a Fed-twat just looking to nitpick at Nadal? Ding ding! I get the prize. I think.

Take a look at the print before that- -- the hype was on the beauty of his game, and how complete a player he was.

You know, I'm absolutely positive that I said in a pervious post that Fed was hyped for his game - NOT his results. Frankly, that's worse, imo. Nadal has only ever been hyped because he had big results when young.

Not on his becoming World #1.

LOL

Yeah, okay. There were questions around Fed, but there were also many who saw the potential there.... yes, to become world number 1. Especially to dominate Wimbledon.

I posted just before this, that a week before Wimbledon articles were still lamenting his lack of mental fortitude

As well as they should have been. He did lack mental fortitude.

It sounds like a Fed-twat is jealous that Nadal is getting a bit more press love than Fed did... even though it's absolutely clear as day as to why he is.

Correct me if I'm wrong ;)

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 01:44 PM
Well you might not remember (I certainly do) is that when there was all this talk on Federer, there was also a lot of talk about Marat, Hewitt and Roddick. And that made sense, because some had proven themselves and others were winning against top players. Federer was definitely not singled out as being the dominant player he has become --he was one amongst a small group of players heralded for the future.

My memory is reasonable actually. Hewitt was dominating at the time and Federer was hyped whether you like it or not, future Wimbledon champion when he beat Sampras. He is a throwback to the old days, once he gets his game he has huge potential to be # 1 this was before he won a Slam and how is that not hype. Roddick was hyped cause he is American and had plenty of power and Safin is just Safin.

When asked by the players at the time about a future #1 Federer was always mentioned.

Last year when Coria went on his incredible run, was there as much hype about him becoming #1 about him as there is now about Nadal? He reached 3 Masters finals and won one and had an amazing streak on clay, too. That's why I say the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments. Some hype is reasonable --it is of my opinion that it is out of line at this moment (until the second Sunday in Paris)

No, there wasn't. There was hype that he could break Muster's consecutive record of wins on clay that is a totally different thing.

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 01:46 PM
I posted just before this, that a week before Wimbledon articles were still lamenting his lack of mental fortitude

Sorry to disturb (and you know very well which player I support), but you must remember Roger was coming to London shortly after losing 1st round in Paris for the second successive year, therefore the main talk was about the lack of mental fortitude.

Nadal is coming to Paris as the hottest player in the warmups, so it's just natural he is the media's favourite for the title - first appearance or not, I mean - who else? :shrug:

Besides, he's not 19 yet and already top 5 - isn't the prospect of him being #1 anytime in the future most sensible?

God knows how objective I'm being here...

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:46 PM
Well you might not remember (I certainly do) is that when there was all this talk on Federer, there was also a lot of talk about Marat, Hewitt and Roddick. And that made sense, because some had proven themselves and others were winning against top players. Federer was definitely not singled out as being the dominant player he has become --he was one amongst a small group of players heralded for the future.

There were many who felt Fed would be the best of his generation. He did have his naysayers, but you seem to be forgetting this other group.

Last year when Coria went on his incredible run, was there as much hype about him becoming #1 about him as there is now about Nadal?

There was SO MUCH Coria hype. As much as Nadal? No. Probably because he's not 18, and doing what Nadal has done at 18 is fucking special :)

I feel like a broken record, but like... a neadrathal would understand what is going on here!

He reached 3 Masters finals and won one and had an amazing streak on clay, too. That's why I say the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments. Some hype is reasonable --it is of my opinion that it is out of line at this moment (until the second Sunday in Paris)

It is out of line because you're bitter. Gotcha ;)

Skyward
05-14-2005, 01:46 PM
As i said before - Federer was SO hyped that people were creating "Federer is overrated!" threads before he won a slam.

:haha: Using your own words, this board is "full of fucking absurd things I have ever read" . I only can speak about US. Before his 2003 Wimbledon win the US media painted him as a guy with a lot of potential who beat Pete Sampras, and that's who he was back then. No magazine covers, no TV talk shows, no meetings with porn stars. ;)
BTW, I don't care about Nadal's hype. If it can help bring tennis back on US TV, I'm all for it.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:47 PM
Sorry to disturb (and you know very well which player I support), but you must remember Roger was coming to London shortly after losing 1st round in Paris for the second successive year, therefore the main talk was about the lack of mental fortitude.

Nadal is coming to Paris as the hottest player in the warmups, so it's just natural he is the media's favourite for the title - first appearance or not, I mean - who else? :shrug:

Besides, he's not 19 yet and already top 5 - isn't the prospect of him being #1 anytime in the future most sensible?

God knows how objective I'm being here...
And if you can do it, anybody should be able to ;)

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:47 PM
:haha: Using your own words, this board is "full of fucking absurd things I have ever read" .

Did you post on the boards back then? Oh? No? Okay then. You've been dismissed.

I only can speak about US.

Yeah. You've truly been dismissed.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:49 PM
It should be argued that Nadal does not save his best performance for slams? Based on what, exactly? This is an argument that makes no sense to me. He was fantastic in Australia. Yes he lost in the 4th round, but he lost to one of the best hardcourters.
:)

I would say, based on not going far in them :rolleyes:
Remember, he is being projected to win a slam and be #1. So, lets look at the performance leading up to it. Hmmmm. Seems that the projection is out of line with the past performance.


Also, there have been many questions about his playing RG for the first time and that posing a bit of a question. However, since not many people go into RG having won MC-Barca-Rome, there will be excitement generated either way.

Indeed there should be excitement. But that's besides the point we are discussing, which is whether the extent of the hype on Nadal seems warranted.


Just admit it - you want to nitpick over Nadal and this is all you've got. And it's not much :)

Just admit it, you have nothing to really defend the hype with, so even when someone makes a point and you secretly agree with it, you must stick to your guns, otherwise how would it look? :wavey:

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:52 PM
I feel like a broken record, but like... a neadrathal would understand what is going on here!
Gotcha ;)

If the "Neadrathal" would only learn to spell first of course. :wavey:

I do understand how you feel like a broken record. You sound like one!

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:54 PM
If the "Neadrathal" would only learn to spell first of course. :wavey:

I'm not spell checking at 9:30 in the morning for somebody who can't even construct a logical argument. One of these two things is far more indicative of intelligence than the either ;)

I do understand how you feel like a broken record. You sound like one!

It's difficult to come up with new points when the person you've ripped a new asshole for keeps repeating themselves. I can only explain to you why you are wrong so many different ways.

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 01:55 PM
Isn't it Neanderthal?

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:57 PM
I would say, based on not going far in them :rolleyes:

Ah, see that is not what you said. You said, in other words, that he fails to perform in slams. You said this based on the fact that he has not performed in a slam since breaking into the top 5 and going on his awesome run. Amazingly, there has not been a slam during that run, which means that your point was absurd. It's called grasping at straws. And it's hilarious. Please don't stop!

Remember, he is being projected to win a slam and be #1. So, lets look at the performance leading up to it. Hmmmm. Seems that the projection is out of line with the past performance.

Anybody with 5 brain cells understands the projection :wavey:



Just admit it, you have nothing to really defend the hype with, so even when someone makes a point and you secretly agree with it, you must stick to your guns, otherwise how would it look? :wavey:

Um, I don't "secretly" agree with anything you've had to say in this thread, unless I've otherwise said so. My points of have been logical and sound. You on the otherhand have fellow Fed fans stepping in to say "yo, you're like, so totally wrong". You sound stupid. Let it go. We're all wrong sometimes, and this is your time.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 01:57 PM
Isn't it Neanderthal?
Don't know, don't care ;)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:57 PM
No, there wasn't. There was hype that he could break Muster's consecutive record of wins on clay that is a totally different thing.

Yes and that's my point --- Coria was leading up to the FO with a spectacular clay season, he had had fantastic results at the FO previously, but also on the hard courts. These should be grounds for heralding a future #1 player. But there was no such talk. And that is why I believe that with Nadal's performance --about as great as Coria's last year-- the talk is much too strong. It is premature, in my opinion.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 01:59 PM
I'm not spell checking at 9:30 in the morning for somebody who can't even construct a logical argument. One of these two things is far more indicative of intelligence than the either ;)
.
Either? you mean other :wavey:
(Now that doesn't take a spell checker. Just a head with a brain ....). :D



It's difficult to come up with new points when the person you've ripped a new asshole for keeps repeating themselves. I can only explain to you why you are wrong so many different ways.

Likwise. I can only tell you that you're deluded in so many ways

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:00 PM
Yes and that's my point --- Coria was leading up to the FO with a spectacular clay season, he had had fantastic results at the FO previously, but also on the hard courts. These should be grounds for heralding a future #1 player. But there was no such talk. And that is why I believe that with Nadal's performance --about as great as Coria's last year-- the talk is much too strong. It is premature, in my opinion.

Actually not I had a problem with the hype about the streak, but there was no talk of Coria being a future # 1 at that stage and if it was it was minimal to say the least.

I have my own opinions on the Nadal hype and bandwagon jumpers and don't need to repeat them.

Skyward
05-14-2005, 02:00 PM
Did you post on the boards back then? Oh? No? Okay then. You've been dismissed.




The right question would be- did I read tennis boards back then? Yes, I did.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:01 PM
Yes and that's my point --- Coria was leading up to the FO with a spectacular clay season, he had had fantastic results at the FO previously, but also on the hard courts. These should be grounds for heralding a future #1 player. But there was no such talk. And that is why I believe that with Nadal's performance --about as great as Coria's last year-- the talk is much too strong. It is premature, in my opinion.
Coria was not on a 17 match winning streak going into RG. Coria had lost his most recent final. Coria was not 18. However, Coria was still considered the RG favourite.

SIGH.

Nitpicking. Wrong.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:02 PM
The right question would be- did I read tennis boards back then? Yes, I did.
If you did, then you should know better to laugh at the idea that people called Fed "overrated". Some people did. Where is GoDom when you need him? He's the one that said it ;)

connectolove
05-14-2005, 02:02 PM
Skyward, and you think that the Nadal hype would bring the sport back into the spotlight? After all, Nadal is not American and most Americans can't care less about foreigners beating their own...

What's true is that Nadal is crossing borders, you should see how fast the Italians warmed up to him! he is very charismatic.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:02 PM
Um, I don't "secretly" agree with anything you've had to say in this thread, unless I've otherwise said so. My points of have been logical and sound. You on the otherhand have fellow Fed fans stepping in to say "yo, you're like, so totally wrong". You sound stupid. Let it go. We're all wrong sometimes, and this is your time.

You sound stupid too :kiss: But that's okay, we got used to it.
You are welcome to delude yourself that your arguments have been logical and sound, they are just "I will stick to my point". My point is that the hype is disproportionate -- it is my opinion, and to me (and many others sounding off on this board) out of line.

And lets not make this a discussion about Fed and Fed fans. We were talking about nadal

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:03 PM
Either? you mean other :wavey:
(Now that doesn't take a spell checker. Just a head with a brain ....). :D




Likwise. I can only tell you that you're deluded in so many ways
This coming from the person who thinks I "secretely agree" with him on things in this thread, despite that fact that I've made it clear I think he's a Fedtwat with dogshit for brains.

Keep making me laugh, darling :kiss:

All you've got on me are typos. You can't even hold an argument, which is pretty much the definition of stupid :lol:

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:03 PM
SIGH.


There you go. Now you sound intelligent. Come on, you can do it!

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 02:03 PM
Just admit it, you have nothing to really defend the hype

I still think that being 18 y.o. (in an era where 18 year olds aren't doing the same things that Mats, Chang, Becker, etc. were able to do) who has been pretty much on fire since he won a very important Davis Cup match at the end of last year warrents some hype. Around the time that the buzz about him started growing his only GS performance has been a 5 set loss on Aussie hardcourt to the eventual finalist, who is one of the best players on the surface. That's not really anything to sneeze at. In the past few months Nadal has really come to form. MC finals in a row- 5 titles w/in 4 months, 3 MC finals in a row- including one on hard court. I think he deserves buzz. And he is young- that adds to the excitment because here is a young fellow who who is suddenly becoming a huge factor. Going from 51 to 5 in the rankings in a matter of 4 or 5 months? I think that's great.

As I said earlier, I am so happy to have buzz about an international player in the US. It is refreshing and I am certainly not going to complain about it or start calling him overrated. And I do think he deserves hype, gosh darn.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:04 PM
There you go. Now you sound intelligent. Come on, you can do it!
We patiently await the day that you can. Holding an argument would be a good place to start, but frankly I don't think you have the power to do so. Too stupid :sad:

I've ripped you a new one and you can't even see it. Another way to define stupid ;)

This is why insulting people who think circles around you is never a good idea. But please don't stop. You're funny :D

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:06 PM
I still think that being 18 y.o. (in an era where 18 year olds aren't doing the same things that Mats, Chang, Becker, etc. were able to do) who has been pretty much on fire since he won a very important Davis Cup match at the end of last year warrents some hype. Around the time that the buzz about him started growing his only GS performance has been a 5 set loss on Aussie hardcourt to the eventual finalist, who is one of the best players on the surface. That's not really anything to sneeze at. In the past few months Nadal has really come to form. MC finals in a row- 5 titles w/in 4 months, 3 MC finals in a row- including one on hard court. I think he deserves buzz. And he is young- that adds to the excitment because here is a young fellow who who is suddenly becoming a huge factor. Going from 51 to 5 in the rankings in a matter of 4 or 5 months? I think that's great.

As I said earlier, I am so happy to have buzz about an international player in the US. It is refreshing and I am certainly not going to complain about it or start calling him overrated. And I do think he deserves hype, gosh darn.
You're wasting your time. Mitalidis is too stupid to comprehend any of that or he would have gotten it when I pointed it out ;)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:06 PM
This coming from the person who thinks I "secretely agree" with him on things in this thread, despite that fact that I've made it clear I think he's a Fedtwat with dogshit for brains.

Keep making me laugh, darling :kiss:

All you've got on me are typos. You can't even hold an argument, which is pretty much the definition of stupid :lol:

Yup. Out comes the language when someone gets frustrated.... its okay sweetheart.... looks like make each other laugh.

Either is not a typo for Other btw.... i

connectolove
05-14-2005, 02:07 PM
Let's see how the French treat him. I have a feeling that they already like him despite of being a major threat against Gasquet.

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:07 PM
Let's see how the French treat him. I have a feeling that they already like him despite of being a major threat against Gasquet.

They don't like Spaniards in France.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:09 PM
Yup. Out comes the language when someone gets frustrated.... its okay sweetheart.... looks like make each other laugh.

Wrong. The language comes out when I'm frustrated, amused, happy, sad.. whatever. The language is me. You might not like it, but you can give up trying to psychoanalyse me because you are doing a pitiful job of doing so :D

You are not intelligent enough to frustrate me. It frustrates me that people as stupid as you can exist without realizing that they are stupid... but I've learned not to get frustrated AT people who are like you. If you can follow that. You probably can't :D


Either is not a typo for Other btw.... i

Actually, it is. But you're stupid so I'm not surprised you can't see how it would be :D

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:09 PM
You're wasting your time. Mitalidis is too stupid to comprehend any of that or he would have gotten it when I pointed it out ;)

Gosh, you sound so frustrated.... chill out.
Chloe, just face it, you're stupid. And its because I first said that in response to your I-tried-to-sound-stupid comment, that got you all riled up.... Tsk Tsk

connectolove
05-14-2005, 02:10 PM
Possible, but they like Nadal because they don't see him as a Spaniard (he doesn't even look Spanish) they see him as a major champ already.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:11 PM
Gosh, you sound so frustrated.... chill out.
Chloe, just face it, you're stupid. And its because I first said that in response to your I-tried-to-sound-stupid comment, that got you all riled up.... Tsk Tsk

Laughing at you for being profoundly stupid is not getting frustrated. I can appreciate that you're too stupid to see that though. Must suck. But you're probably too stupid to realize that it sucks :D

I'm extremely intelligent. An imbecile on a messageboard who can't pick apart a single point I have presented isn't going to change that. But that won't stop you from trying. And wishful thinking. Just like you do with Nadal ;)

Skyward
05-14-2005, 02:11 PM
Skyward, and you think that the Nadal hype would bring the sport back into the spotlight?


No, I don't. But one can have a hope. I even could survive Ginepri's hype, if it could help bring tennis back on USTV. :D

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:12 PM
Wrong. The language comes out when I'm frustrated, amused, happy, sad.. whatever. The language is me. You might not like it, but you can give up trying to psychoanalyse me because you are doing a pitiful job of doing so :D

You are not intelligent enough to frustrate me. It frustrates me that people as stupid as you can exist without realizing that they are stupid... but I've learned not to get frustrated AT people who are like you. If you can follow that. You probably can't :D


Er.... :confused: I cannot follow. This is such a deep and cleverly written statement. I just don't know how to understand it. This is far too deep for MTF

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:13 PM
No, I don't. But one can have a hope. I even could survive Ginepri's hype, if it could help bring tennis back on USTV. :D
Ginepri hype :haha:

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:13 PM
Er.... :confused: I cannot follow. This is such a deep and cleverly written statement. I just don't know how to understand it. This is far too deep for MTF


Still can't rip apart any of my points, can you? Didn't think so. Too stupid :D

connectolove
05-14-2005, 02:14 PM
George W.Hitler. I recently read from someone that the French dislike the Spanish players because they are far better than their own, I think it goes further than that, the French and the Spanish never liked each other that much.

When I was in Monte Carlo and Nadal was playing, you should have heard their comments, they REALLY liked him!

We shall see...

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:14 PM
Laughing at you for being profoundly stupid is not getting frustrated. I can appreciate that you're too stupid to see that though. Must suck. But you're probably too stupid to realize that it sucks :D

I'm extremely intelligent. An imbecile on a messageboard who can't pick apart a single point I have presented isn't going to change that. But that won't stop you from trying. And wishful thinking. Just like you do with Nadal ;)

Yes, that's right. It's only the very intelligent who feel the need to tell everyone " I'm intelligent. HEY, listen. I said I'm intelligent... wait, I said I'm intelligent." :p

I'm glad I make you laugh. That indeed was my goal :p

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:18 PM
Yes, that's right. It's only the very intelligent who feel the need to tell everyone " I'm intelligent. HEY, listen. I said I'm intelligent... wait, I said I'm intelligent." :p

I'm glad I make you laugh. That indeed was my goal :p
I know my strengths. There is no need to be envious because I happen to be more than happy to boast about them. You don't see me saying that I have a great ass, do you? :wavey:

Anyways, I apologize to everybody who actually took the time to read the last three pages or so ;)

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:19 PM
I know my strengths. There is no need to be envious because I happen to be more than happy to boast about them. You don't see me saying that I have a great ass, do you? :wavey:

Anyways, I apologize to everybody who actually took the time to read the last three pages or so ;)

I know your strengths too -- I think your ass is fabulous

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:20 PM
George W.Hitler. I recently read from someone that the French dislike the Spanish players because they are far better than their own, I think it goes further than that, the French and the Spanish never liked each other that much.

When I was in Monte Carlo and Nadal was playing, you should have heard their comments, they REALLY liked him!

We shall see...

I have said something like that and I'll answer this in the RG thread in greater detail.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:20 PM
I know your strengths too -- I think your ass is fabulous
Aw, thanks. I think you have great legs.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:21 PM
Aw, thanks. I think you have great legs.

Thanks sweetie

connectolove
05-14-2005, 02:22 PM
B]Chloe[/B] No need to apologize...I haven't read it, but I am sure that you guys had fun!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :nerner: :nerner: :nerner: :cuckoo: :cuckoo: :smash: :smash: :smash: :shout: :shout:

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:26 PM
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :nerner: :nerner: :nerner: :cuckoo: :cuckoo: :smash: :smash: :smash: :shout: :shout:

Yeah, that's kind of what it was like ;)

Skyward
05-14-2005, 02:27 PM
Nadal was taken to a tennis club at the age of 4 and he went back, on his own, the next day, and the next... he really enjoyed it and wanted to do it.
Safin always wanted to be a soccer player, he was FORCED to stop playing soccer to pick up a racket. Perhaps he has issues with it. :mad:

It's irrelevant, but from my observation ( I've lived in Russia for 3 years) all Russian boys want to be soccer/ ice hockey players.
Give Safin some credit, he left his family at 13 to play tennis in Spain, it's not the easiest thing to do.

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 02:27 PM
I even could survive Ginepri's hype

Shudders at the thought of Ginepri hype. He reminds me of this stupid idiot wrestler boy in high school who used to cheat off of my biology exams and once, at a party, bet that he could make me "drop my panties" in 10 minutes. Needless to say he did not win the bet.

mitalidas
05-14-2005, 02:28 PM
Yeah, that's kind of what it was like ;)
And better still. A few emoticons can't really describe it in words.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:28 PM
Shudders at the thought of Ginepri hype. He reminds me of this stupid idiot wrestler boy in high school who used to cheat off of my biology exams and once, at a party, bet that he could make me "drop my panties" in 10 minutes. Needless to say he did not win the bet.
Ah, so you've heard Ginepri speak on ESPN too? ;)

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 02:31 PM
Ah, so you've heard Ginepri speak on ESPN too?

Oh yes- and the astuteness of his mind astounded me. ;) Seriously- the boy is as dumb as a box of hair.

Like your avatar- saw that little media snippet that that came from where he was trying to speak English and was goofing up. Very cute.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:34 PM
Oh yes- and the astuteness of his mind astounded me. ;) Seriously- the boy is as dumb as a box of hair.

lol... My jaw was literally hanging ajar while listening to his "interview" on ESPN a couple years ago. Part of me died that day.

Like your avatar- saw that little media snippet that that came from where he was trying to speak English and was goofing up. Very cute.

Where did you see it? I didn't see it and was wondering why he was doing that.

Clara Bow
05-14-2005, 02:40 PM
Where did you see it? I didn't see it and was wondering why he was doing that.

Here you go. It has a bunch of players from Rome. Quite funny and cute.

http://stade2.france2.fr/video/stade2g_20050508.asx

Part of me died that day.

Me too - the part that thought that neurons had to connect in the brains of all functioning humans. :D

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 08:38 PM
I lived in the UK till 2003 (and still work there part of the year) so I did see what was written about him and spoken about him. But was it as severe as the talk on Nadal now? I don't ever remember that. I remember many commentators talking about how beautiful his game was, but it was most certainly not mentioned at the drop of a hat "will win a slam this year, will be number 1 soon".

You obviously didn't read any of Mal's columns back in the day.

On topic, I am :eek: over this thread, which I created out of boredom and thought would only get a handful of replies.

I didn' t realize Nadal was going to be so controversial (or beaten by Gasquet in the MTF Showdown)...This almost matches the length of a typical Marat thread. Interesting.

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 08:44 PM
I'm not struggling. Where exactly are you struggling to get my point? :rolleyes: Really, its not that hard : It is my opinion that the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments.

Just as Federer was inconsistent, leading to questions about his mental fortitude, it should be argued that Nadal does not save his best performance for the slams and should thus lead to questions about his being the favourite in a slam (let alone one he hasn't played before)
Hi :wavey:

I'm the one who posted that article. The reason Fed was even the topic of articles such as that was because of the hype. The press was disappointed that he was not winning the Slams as they thought he should have been, thus giving way to articles about his mental fortitude...

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 08:49 PM
Well you might not remember (I certainly do) is that when there was all this talk on Federer, there was also a lot of talk about Marat, Hewitt and Roddick. And that made sense, because some had proven themselves and others were winning against top players. Federer was definitely not singled out as being the dominant player he has become --he was one amongst a small group of players heralded for the future.
Fed was not singled out because he hadn't one a Slam and *was* part of the New Balls group. Nadal has emerged first of the Baby Balls, as Safin had emerged as the first New Balls to win a Slam. In the near future, you'll hear more about Gasquet, Monfils, Young, or whoever young person breaks through at a Slam first...

Last year when Coria went on his incredible run, was there as much hype about him becoming #1 about him as there is now about Nadal? He reached 3 Masters finals and won one and had an amazing streak on clay, too. That's why I say the hype on Nadal is disproportionate to his accomplishments. Some hype is reasonable --it is of my opinion that it is out of line at this moment (until the second Sunday in Paris)
Not number 1, but everyone expected him to win the French Open.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 08:59 PM
Skyward... this is for you:

http://www.wtaworld.com/archive/index.php/t-28218.html

FInding that made my day! (I was hung over and slept all day... it's been slow, okay?)

My favourite part so far is reading that Fed is like a poor mans Kafelnikov :lol:

Anyways, people in that thread are responding to something, and that something is excessive hype.

:D

Skyward
05-14-2005, 09:20 PM
Skyward... this is for you:

http://www.wtaworld.com/archive/index.php/t-28218.html

:D

Thanks. I couldn't find any single gem in a pile of http://www.assklown.net/smileys/signs/Poop.gif Anyway, JohnW picking Roger to win Wimbledon in 2002 is not more outrageous than Cliff Drysdale picking Nadal to win FO last year.

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 09:26 PM
Don't forget Mal :yeah: He picked Federer every time, thus it was his fault...

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 09:33 PM
Thanks. I couldn't find any single gem in a pile of http://www.assklown.net/smileys/signs/Poop.gif Anyway, JohnW picking Roger to win Wimbledon in 2002 is not more outrageous than Cliff Drysdale picking Nadal to win FO last year.
I was crazy Canuck in that thread... and as you can see, I didn't find it outrageous either ;)

I'm just pointing out that I did not make that thread up, and that the comments in the thread are in response to the Federer hype.

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 09:43 PM
A gem from Mal (in the pre-premium days of yore):

"A player equally as confident right now but with a better all-court game than Roddick is Roger Federer. He won his first grass-court tournament last week in Halle, Germany. Federer might have the ability to be as good on grass as Pete Sampras. I'm not going to say Federer's going to win seven Wimbledons like Sampras, but without question if he doesn't win it once in his career, I don't think he will have fulfilled his potential."
--On Federer going into the 2003 Wimbledon tournament.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 09:44 PM
At least Mal had good timing on that one. Still, it does go to show that yes, people said things like Federer might have the ability to be as good on grass as Pete Sampras. before Fed won a slam (which is fine, because as things are looking now they may have been right). But we already knew that, didn't we?

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 09:50 PM
Also from ESPN during the FO 2003...

Friday, July 18
Swiss misses opportunity again
By Greg Garber
ESPN.com


PARIS -- He was a three-time champion already this year, at Marseille, Dubai and Munich. He was a finalist three weeks ago in Rome, having defeated highly regarded Juan Carlos Ferrero in the semifinals. Most important, he was the No. 5 seed here at Roland Garros.


The red clay of Roland Garros seems to be a stumbling block fro Roger Federer.


Was, as in the past tense, for Roger Federer is already gone. The Swiss Miss was a 7-6 (6), 6-2, 7-6 (3) loser to Peruvian Luis Horna -- technically, the biggest upset Monday as the French Open began. A number of tennis aficionados had installed Federer as the pre-tournament favorite.

"No one," observed top-seeded Serena Williams, after hammering Germany's Barbara Rittner 6-2, 6-1 in a tidy 54 minutes, "wants to lose in the first round -- especially of a Grand Slam."

And, understand, Federer is thought to be a player of substance. At 21, he has the big game of a future Grand Slam champion. On the center court, Philippe-Chatrier, he ran into a perfect storm named Luis. Horna, 22, won his first Grand Slam match ever -- after two previous failures, at last year's U.S. Open and this year's Australian Open.

"This is the most wonderful feeling that I've ever had throughout my life," Horna said. "My first time at Roland Garros, I've been very nervous."

Actually, it is not his first time here. Six years ago, Horna was the boys' singles runner-up and doubles champion at the age of 16. On Monday, he looked younger and more energetic than the stoic Federer.

"It's a big disappointment," Federer said, stating the obvious. "Very sad to leave so early. It's not fun. He definitely didn't play a bad match, but I didn't play a good match. I definitely think I helped him."

Throughout the match, Federer was oddly laconic. It was the second straight year that he was banished after the first round; Hicham Arazi had the straight-sets honors a year ago.

At the same time, Horna was aggressive and feisty. In the first set, after he had a run-in with the chair umpire over a line call, Horna left a tennis ball on the court -- just outside the line umpire Remy Azemar claimed the ball had touched. While Federer seemed off-balance and stiff, Horna moved around the red courts with ease, picking his spots artfully.

Horna had already won the first two sets, one easily, one not, when he found himself in a third-set tie-breaker. He was up 4-3, when Federer double-faulted blowing a chance to draw even. Horna, by now feeling it, stepped into a forehand and ripped a winner down the line to go up 6-3. Federer's weak backhand into the net was his last shot.

The turning point came with Federer leading tenuously, at 5-4, in the first set. Horna was able to break him and, when Federer missed an overhead and squandered a set point, Horna prevailed in the tiebreaker.

"It's not the smash that makes me disappointed, it's the way I lost the first set," Federer said. "The overhead was just adding to the whole thing. I knew the danger. People [were] saying, 'Who is the first seed you're playing?' I told them, 'You guys have to relax a little bit because I'm not playing a bad guy in the first round.' Here I am, you know, sitting, trying to explain why."

Horna credited his coach, Gabriel Markus, with settling him down before the match. Federer, after all, had beaten Horna in straight sets earlier this year on the hard courts at Miami.

"He said, 'Try to make the best of [your possibilities]. You have to feel happy,' " Horna said. "That's what I tried to do. I thought to myself last night that this was a great chance for me. All I have to do the best I can. I won, so this is the best thing that ever happened to me."

That matter, however, is open to conjecture. You see, Horna's wife gave birth to a daughter, Luna, only a month ago.

"I said this is the best day of my life, but you cannot compare the winning in tennis and the coming of a daughter," he said. "The coming of a daughter is something you cannot compare to anything else."

With the courts playing slow and the balls heavier than usual, it looks like the clay-court wizards are going to have the upper hand this fortnight. Federer's downfall means an American hard-court player, 29th-seeded Vince Spadea, now won't face a higher seed than himself until the round of 16. But Federer's demise raises some questions -- albeit early in his career -- about the stoutness of his heart.

After reaching the quarterfinals in 2001, he is now a stark 0-for-2.

Will Federer become one of those strong, gifted players (like Pete Sampras?) who comes to dread the French Open?

"We'll see about that," Federer said. "It's not a question I can answer now at this moment in my career. I've had good moments and not so good moments. This year, it didn't work. I'm not going to start hating the tournament just because I lost twice in the first round.

"I'm not really sure I can win this tournament. We have a number of players here who have got better experience on this surface."

Greg Garber is a senior writer for ESPN.com.

Skyward
05-14-2005, 10:34 PM
I don't see a lot of hype in these articles. It's more like- the guy got all the tools- why the heck can't he win a few matches in majors?!
My definition of hype is when the media starts promoting a very young player whose game is still developing and who hasn't done much at small events.
At least by 2002-2003 Fed won some tournaments and beat a few top players. Concerning Mal, what is he talking about? First, he's saying Fed's game on grass as good as Sampras, then he proceeds talking about winning at least one Wimbledon. I can suggest that if Nadal doesn't win at least one RG, his career would be a disappointment. Is it hype? No, it's stating the obvious, that's what Mal does best.

Tennis Fool
05-14-2005, 10:43 PM
At least by 2002-2003 Fed won some tournaments and beat a few top players.
Hasn't Nadal done this, only for 2004-2005?

The only player I can see being over hyped and pushed is 15 y.o. Donald Young.

Skyward
05-14-2005, 10:57 PM
Hasn't Nadal done this, only for 2004-2005?

The only player I can see being over hyped and pushed is 15 y.o. Donald Young.

I wasn't the one who complained about Nadal's hype. It's not a problem for me. I learned how to watch figure skating with the sound off, it's even easier with tennis matches. :lol:.

tangerine_dream
05-15-2005, 02:46 AM
Marat-mode: Oh, now it's all Nadal Nadal Nadal .... ;)

The Sunday Times - Sport

May 15, 2005
Tennis: Prince of the court
BARRY FLATMAN
A few weeks ago it would have been unthinkable, but Rafael Nadal’s form makes him a French Open contender

Those who purport to know about matters of adolescence maintain that much can be gleaned of a youth’s characteristics by table manners. Teenagers who bolt their food are likely to be impetuous; eating too slowly may depict hesitation. Denied sustenance by the pressures of fame, Rafael Nadal contemplated a late lunch with a calculated plan of strategy and meticulously set about the task of satisfying his ravenous hunger.

Most people his age would opt for a burger or the like after being deprived of dinner the previous night by the demands of work and then forced to rush breakfast. Fittingly, however, a plate of seafood lay before the 18-year-old who was raised on the Mediterranean island of Majorca; slivers of salmon, crab, scallops and king prawns.

Selecting the rarest of tuna steaks, Nadal neatly cut the fish into six equal strips with the same precision with which he has carved up most of his tennis opposition over the past few months. He eats his food in the same way he plays his sport; deliberate, assured and in a manner beyond his years.

And the fact that most of the tennis world expects him to become the most successful debutant at a Grand Slam tournament for almost a quarter of a century is not about to cause even the faintest twinge. “It is good, I like,” he says with a smile, spearing a piece of fish, but knowing that another session of interrogation on the matter of his sensational rise over the past six months is about to begin.

Laying down his fork to answer the initial and most obvious question, he brushes away the thick mop of black hair that perpetually shades his left eye and answers: “No, I don’t really believe what is going on for me right now, because everything is falling my way, but the sensible thing is not to think about it too much. Five tournament wins is great, no? And big titles, in Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome. It makes me very happy, but I know I don’t win these things through luck. I win because I work hard and play good. All I can do is make sure those things carry on and then maybe I will win some more. If I got to the French (Open) and keep playing like this, I have a good chance, because nobody has beaten me recently, but I don’t know if that’s going to happen.”

Youthful exuberance has had little to do with the trail of success Nadal has left through the showpiece clay courts of the world this year. He may be a player who has prematurely come of age since scoring the pivotal win over world No 2 Andy Roddick that heralded Spain’s victory in last December’s Davis Cup final.

But he is*perfectly at ease with the situation, and although Roger Federer is the world’s top-ranked male player and Gaston Gaudio the defending champion, it is the boy with the body and mind of a grown man who is expected to lift the Coupe des Mousquetaires in three weeks.

Yet those closest to Nadal remain amazed by the demeanour of the player who started the year ranked outside the world’s top 50 and is now No 5. “He just doesn’t seem affected or bothered by it all,” says his agent, Carlos Costa, a top 10 player in the early 1990s who says he is now far busier dealing with the business side of sport’s newest superstar.

“I notice no pressure in his mind, just a maturity that I have never seen in somebody so young.”

Benito Perez-Barbadillo, the ATP’s director of communications and Latin relations, agrees, but adds: “Watching the way he handles everything to do with his tennis, you would never realise how introverted he can be off the court. Rafa is the most famous thing ever to happen in his home town of Manacor, but when he goes home he is still shy when it comes to talking to the girls he likes. He can do whatever he likes on a tennis court, but back home, being a normal teenager, he has the same problems as so many other kids.”

Perhaps the French Open title and its potential financial rewards might improve his attraction, although Nadal is already doing pretty well in that department, with career prize-money to date of more than $2m. He is following a proud Spanish tradition, established more than 40 years ago by Manolo Santana and repeated by Andres Gimeno, Sergi Bruguera, Carlos Moya, Albert Costa and Juan Carlos Ferrero.

Yet Nadal refuses to put undue pressure on himself and riles at the suggestion that it has always been his ambition to follow this line of succession. “Nunca (never),” he snaps. “It is wrong to think so high at a young age. It is not clever for me to hear what the people are saying about me going to Roland Garros this year. Right now I’m just thinking if I lose, it’s because nobody can win every week.

“If I don’t win another match this year, I will have accomplished the goal I set in January of getting into the top 20 in 2005. Last year it was the same, I just wanted to win my first ATP tournament and I did that in August after missing three months. Then there was Davis Cup final, and now to win Masters Series finals twice against a player like (Guillermo) Coria, who people said was the best in the world on clay last year, is a great thing. But I know I won’t be able to keep playing like this all the time. It is not normal to win the sort of matches I have been winning. I know a bad patch will come. The important thing is that this will be my first year playing in Paris, not my last.”

Such a defence mechanism is understandable. Public expectation has long been a factor in Nadal’s life. Almost from the time he chose to concentrate on tennis rather than football at 12, he has been the focus of media attention in his homeland.

When fellow Majorcan Moya was the champion of Roland Garros in 1998 and subsequently the world No 1, he was quick to recognise the youngster’s talent and volunteered for the role of mentor to a player he was convinced would ultimately succeed him. A year later, Nadal was chosen as the Spanish flag-carrier as Barcelona staged the Davis Cup final against Australia, at which patriotism and subsequent ill-feeling courtside resulted in the away team’s captain, John Newcombe, giving serious consideration to silencing his antagonistic opposite number, Javier Duarte, with a well-timed right hook to the jaw.

Nadal has been groomed for the test to come, being pitched into men’s tournaments at 14 rather than playing on*the junior circuit. With his 16th birthday still several months distant, he registered his first ATP Tour victory over Paraguay’s Ramon Delgado on the Majorcan clay of Palma. “What was the need for Rafa to play against boys when he was already strong enough to take on the men ?” says Perez- Barbadillo.

Everything was on the upward curve until almost 12 months ago, when he found himself, sad and dispirited, hobbling on crutches at Roland Garros after fracturing an ankle in a build-up tournament at Estoril. “At the time I was feeling very down and the idea was to make me feel happier by seeing what I would experience,” Nadal recalls, pondering added misfortune because a year earlier he had been prevented from competing because of an elbow injured during practice. “I watched my friend Carlos (Moya) win his first-round match and I was glad for him, but not being able to play made me feel bad and I just wanted to go home.”

Nadal will be in the same place this weekend, again far away from tennis. For a time he will be sitting on a fishing boat a couple of kilometres off the Majorcan coast. Together with a group of childhood friends he will have made the 15-minute drive from his hometown, heading east away from tourist traps of Magaluf, Cala Major and the capital, Palma, instead setting sail from Porto Cristo, intent on catching a few halibut or perhaps even a swordfish. His beloved Real Madrid’s match against Seville also has huge importance (and the fact that his uncle, the recently retired Miguel Angel, was a Barcelona legend has no bearing on whom the youngster wants to win La Liga).

And of course there will be the Pro Evolution game on his PlayStation, a near obsessional method of relaxation that eventually allowed him to calm down in the small hours of Monday morning after five hours and as many sets of intense confrontation against Coria to win the Master Series title in Rome.

Tomorrow or the day after he will return to the courts, although he will be careful not to aggravate the cut on his left hand which he suffered in that concentrated struggle against Coria, the reason for his perhaps timely inability to contest the Masters Series tournament in Hamburg. A photoshoot for the American magazine People will be a brief distraction before he flies to Paris on Wednesday.

The consensus among those who know first-hand what it takes to succeed in the ultimate test of clay-court play is he will return as French champion. Even the wily Coria, perfectly qualified to make a discompassionate judgment between the chances of Nadal and Federer after losing to both in the past week, is insistent: “Sometimes you think Roger is impossible to beat, but of the two, Rafa is far the stronger on clay.”

Sham Kay
09-08-2010, 11:47 PM
Boy. Rafa was so freakin' hyped. Wonder if anyone will ever be this hyped again in our lifetime..

connectolove
09-09-2010, 12:03 AM
Rafa is one of a kind... the stuff that the greatest are made of.

careergrandslam
09-09-2010, 12:50 AM
:worship:

anticaria
09-09-2010, 12:59 AM
wow, I havent seen so much hype about a player since the hype over Roger
But Roger had won a Slam, in beautiful style, to get that hype


rafa's hype is more than justified in my humble opinion, and i say this not as a rafa fan, but as someone who has taken a look at both roger's and rafa's career stats at the majors:


rafa won his first french open title ('05) on his first attempt/roger required 11 attempts and rafa's absence from the finals before he could win his first french open title ('09)

rafa won his first wimbledon title ('08) on his 5th attempt/roger also won his first wimbledon title ('03) on his 5th attempt..

rafa won his first australian open title ('09) on his 5th attempt/roger also won his first australian open title ('04) on his 5th attempt..

roger won his first us open title ('04) on his 5th attempt/rafa could potentially win his first us open title this year on his 8th attempt..

which means that not only did rafa win his first-ever slam event on his first time out (something the great roger was never able to do), but he's also matched roger's pace at both wimbledon and the australian open, and he now stands to 'potentially' win his first us open title this year in 3 fewer attempts than it took roger to win his first french open title (and the guy hasn't even dropped a set yet.. on his worst surface i might add)..

again, i don't think one has to personally like rafa in order to appreciate how superlative those numbers are.. come on, let's be fair to the guy at least.. he's earned the hype and lived up to it one hundredfold.. :worship:

oranges
09-09-2010, 01:15 AM
The thread and thus the hype was from before his first slam, you dolt. The person you´re quoting was comennting on that.

Pirata.
09-09-2010, 01:49 AM
rafa won his first french open title ('05) on his first attempt/roger required 11 attempts and rafa's absence from the finals before he could win his first french open title ('09)

rafa won his first wimbledon title ('08) on his 5th attempt/roger also won his first wimbledon title ('03) on his 5th attempt..

rafa won his first australian open title ('09) on his 5th attempt/roger also won his first australian open title ('04) on his 5th attempt..

roger won his first us open title ('04) on his 5th attempt/rafa could potentially win his first us open title this year on his 8th attempt..

which means that not only did rafa win his first-ever slam event on his first time out (something the great roger was never able to do), but he's also matched roger's pace at both wimbledon and the australian open, and he now stands to 'potentially' win his first us open title this year in 3 fewer attempts than it took roger to win his first french open title (and the guy hasn't even dropped a set yet.. on his worst surface i might add)..


So basically the USO is to Rafa what Roland Garros is to Roger.

Okay.

Pirao666
11-10-2013, 04:48 PM
Well, all those 3 greats were right. Real recognizes real.

Kyle_Johansen
11-10-2013, 04:52 PM
This article proves just how much potential a lot of people saw in Nadal even at 18. That he was a favourite for the French Open in 05 shows how early he matured physically and mentally. Unreal.

Chris Kuerten
11-10-2013, 09:21 PM
This article proves just how much potential a lot of people saw in Nadal even at 18. That he was a favourite for the French Open in 05 shows how early he matured physically and mentally. Unreal.GOAT worthy, unlike having a 10-22 record against your main rival.