Are All Potential Fed Supporters Converted? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Are All Potential Fed Supporters Converted?

Jairus
04-26-2006, 05:40 AM
It looks like the media (USA at least...Bricker, Cronin, etc.) has made a semi-universal decision to declare Fed as being owned by Nadal. The loss combined with the Fed's less than spectacular post-match interview seem to have done the trick. The question is, are there still Fed supporters who would be change their minds (ie. start beliving that Nadal is more likely to win heads up) if Federer kept losing duels? Or are the remaining fans (as in people who think Fed will beat Nadal soon, say during this clay season) all people whose opinions won't change?
It is sort of important, because this begs the question, will the media be more anti-Fed than it is today if Fed loses more, or has it hit the bottom?
Of course, this is assuming that Fed's other performances stay the same, ie. he doesn't totally self destruct and start losing lots of first rounds...that would probably make even his die-hard's think twice.

Allez
04-26-2006, 06:00 AM
How does acknowledging that Rafa currently owns Roger equate to being Anti-Fed ? I mean do you think people are being anti ATP by pointing out that Roger owns most of the players out there at the moment ? I just don't get your question. One's opinions should be based on facts and not blind fanaticism. Unfortunately the facts now read 4-1 in Nadal's favour. This should be clear even to the most daft of sheeple...

Castafiore
04-26-2006, 06:41 AM
Of course, this is assuming that Fed's other performances stay the same, ie. he doesn't totally self destruct and start losing lots of first rounds...
That's daft. Self destruct? Federer? Not a chance.

Furthermore, it's ridiculous to even suggest that the media is anti-Fed. Reading various articles about him over the past few months, the respect and the admiration he has in the media is huge and this defeat does not change that one bit.
I mean, look at what he already has accomplished this year. It's silly to ignore those performances and I have seen no evidence that most journalists have suddenly forgotten that.

Jairus
04-26-2006, 07:27 AM
So to clarify a bit, I meant the public/media's opinion about Fed specifically in regards to his chances against Nadal, not broadly anti-fed. The idea is, if Fed loses more to Nadal, will more people join the camp of "Nadal will generally beat Fed" or have all the people who might join that camp already gone there?
Also, I think the media has gotten sharply critical of Fed after Sunday's loss especially compared to how they have considered him in the past. Even after the loss in Dubai, there was only a few mutterings about Fed fearing Nadal. But apparently the difference between 3-1 and 4-1 and dramatic, because there is a lot more press about Nadal owning Fed.

Allstar
04-26-2006, 07:33 AM
Im in the 'Federer will formulate a way to beat Nadal when he doesnt play to his best' because when Federer plays his best no-one can touch him imo. Nadal disruptes him and in a sense makes him beat himself.

bokehlicious
04-26-2006, 07:35 AM
Papers may write what they want. After Roger's FO win they won't remember that Monte Carlo tier 1 loss, and kiss Roger's arse again :angel: . Period. :p

Jairus
04-26-2006, 07:59 AM
See, take you two, Allstar and JM. I am in the same group as you guys...do you really think that if Fed keeps losing close matches to Nadal and dominates the rest of the tour, we will change our minds? I feel like I wouldn't; rather, I would still be waiting for Fed to really put it together and crush Nadal (yes, probably won't happen, but it seems like it should, b/c of my bizzaro interpretation of the world of tennis: Fed wins, always). I was just wondering if others thought that way.

bokehlicious
04-26-2006, 08:09 AM
Jairus, I won't change my mind, I am not a 'bandwagoner', I enjoy beautiful tennis, beautiful shots and tactics. Even whether Roger loses his next 20 encounters against Nadal, I'll never root for that latter, his game and personnality just don't fit me.

TheMightyFed
04-26-2006, 08:27 AM
Fed will beat Nadal in slam finals.

Peoples
04-26-2006, 10:23 AM
Fed will beat Nadal in slam finals.
I don't see how the Monte Carlo final was different from a clay slam final. It's a strategic loss when someone's game just matches up badly with Federer's, nothing else. If you simply don't have solutions against someone's game then only a miracle will help, e.g. the Gaudio-Coria theatre final.

Federer is "getting closer" to Nadal? I don't buy that. Roger still hasn't foudn the strategy. Nadal is a counter-puncher whose level depends on how the other player is playing. Nadal only dominates when you let him. You can't "learn how to beat his game", you can't get closer to him, you have to play your game so that he can't get all those the balls back and this isn't happening with Nadal/Federer.

TheMightyFed
04-26-2006, 10:34 AM
I don't see how the Monte Carlo final was different from a clay slam final. It's a strategic loss when someone's game just matches up badly with Federer's, nothing else. If you simply don't have solutions against someone's game then only a miracle will help, e.g. the Gaudio-Coria theatre final.

Federer is "getting closer" to Nadal? I don't buy that. Roger still hasn't foudn the strategy. Nadal is a counter-puncher whose level depends on how the other player is playing. Nadal only dominates when you let him. You can't "learn how to beat his game", you can't get closer to him, you have to play your game so that he can't get all those the balls back and this isn't happening with Nadal/Federer.
I may be in denial but I believe that Grand Slams are beyond logic sometimes, especially FO, think Lendl-Chang 89, Gaudio-Coria 04. Nadal is nearly unbeatable on clay, everybody agrees. Now in a slam a champion can go much beyond his capabilities, see Safin USO 00, or Connors USo 91. This is why slams are unique, they offer surprises. Roger has trouble dealing with Nadal but he will always be a challenge to him. Edberg had a 2-1 record against Becker in Wimbledon finals while the overall record is 10-25 for Becker. It's a mind game and in a slam final, Federer is not Puerta, he's in another league.

betterthanhenman
04-26-2006, 10:36 AM
To answer the thread title/question...No!

Peoples
04-26-2006, 10:48 AM
I may be in denial but I believe that Grand Slams are beyond logic sometimes, especially FO, think Lendl-Chang 89, Gaudio-Coria 04. Nadal is nearly unbeatable on clay, everybody agrees. Now in a slam a champion can go much beyond his capabilities, see Safin USO 00, or Connors USo 91. This is why slams are unique, they offer surprises. Roger has trouble dealing with Nadal but he will always be a challenge to him. Edberg had a 2-1 record against Becker in Wimbledon finals while the overall record is 10-25 for Becker. It's a mind game and in a slam final, Federer is not Puerta, he's in another league.
You are right these things do happen but they're sort of miracles that I wouldn't bet on. Slams are unique but in slams Nadal is still 1-0 vs Federer. Sure Fed is always a challenge for Nad but Nadal does have the confidence of having done it before while Federer will be the one doubting. Nadal feeds off this kind of doubt. In a way this is a unique situation for Federer so we will see but on clay i.e. in RG I'd put my money on Nadal although I do have the confidence that eventually Federer will learn and overcome this.

TheMightyFed
04-26-2006, 12:08 PM
You are right these things do happen but they're sort of miracles that I wouldn't bet on.
I believe in miracles...

avocadoe
04-26-2006, 12:25 PM
There are two ways for Roger to beat Rafa's current game, even on clay, maybe. He has to play great for 5 sets. He has to play the way he played during 2004. Great serving and far fewer errors. He also needs to use the net whenever he can. His movement has improved again, post injuries, but still not 100 percent. He needs that, too. Rafa is in his head, but not entirely in a bad way. He's a puzzle for him. Roger is very smart and may figure him out. The second wy to beat Nadal is for Nadal to play not his best. That has to happen sometime, no? But losing to Nadal doesn't take anything away from Roger for me. I love hs game, his smile, everything. I'm not a Nadal detractor, either. I enjoy his game for what it is, and on clay, I find it fiery and exciting to watch. But cmon Roger beat him up in Rome or Paris, or both :) As far as the pres goes, I am hoping for an article by Bud Collins!!!!

yanchr
04-26-2006, 12:52 PM
I don't see how the Monte Carlo final was different from a clay slam final.
Sure it's different. Technically, probably not, but tennis is not all about techniques. You know it's Monte Carlo, you know it's not RG, it already makes a big difference on your approach to the match psychologically. The fact that it is a grand slam final will get to you much more than you know it's not. And the final result will also have a much bigger effect on your mentality. Not that I'm saying Roger will beat Nadal if it's RG final, but a grand slam final is not what a TMS final can ever compare with.

You are right these things do happen but they're sort of miracles that I wouldn't bet on.
You regard Roger beating Nadal in RG final a miracle? Surely not me.

Velvetcat
04-26-2006, 12:59 PM
I can't see Roger beating Nadal in the near future (unless Rafa's injured etc). This isn't a 'conversion', of any kind.

Until Roger admits there is a problem there's no way he'll fix it.

I think when Fed plays Nadal, he feels similarly to how players not named Nadal feel when they play him. Plus overwhelming pressure.

If Roger could unblock his mind, he'd fare way better. As it is, Nadal's only going to get better.

Oh & I don't think this loss will influence the press, though his press conference response to it is another story.

almouchie
04-26-2006, 01:28 PM
atm Nadal is head & shoulders above the other palyers on clay & Federer included
what I want to see is if
Nadal has it in him to win the RG this year
several players have won RG once ,thou few have dominated on clay for a long time
the last player to ride supreme in RG was Gustavi Guga Kuerten.
just like Federer, Nadal will lose only if he loses his form or has an awful day,
it doesnt look like the rest of the players have something to hurt nadal
granted RAfa is more likely to lose in the earlier rounds than Federer
but at 19 vs 24, Rafa is doing very well

mishar
04-26-2006, 01:31 PM
It's not like Nadal is flat-out dominating Fed... He has the mental edge at the moment. Perhaps that will change, perhaps that won't. I felt if Roger could play every set the way he did the first set in Dubai he will beat Rafa mostly, at least on HC.
To me Rafa will always be the favorite on clay. Perhaps Fed will sneak out a few wins, it's not like he can't play on the stuff.
I think overall it's great for tennis. Fed has been so dominant -- it's good for him and for the game to have someone who really challenges him. THey're both great players. Having watched tennis long enough, I just know it's very foolish to make predictions for the future. Dominant one day, crumbling the next. Rivalries turn around unexpectedly sometimes.
In other words, while I support and like both players, I would never dismiss Fed's chances against Nadal... on HC I still think he'd win the big matches despite the H2H and on clay while he is the definite underdog, I think he will be Nadal's greatest challenge.

Peoples
04-26-2006, 05:44 PM
The second wy to beat Nadal is for Nadal to play not his best. That has to happen sometime, no?
Nadal always play good match, no? Nadal play very consistent, no?

Sure it's different. Technically, probably not, but tennis is not all about techniques. You know it's Monte Carlo, you know it's not RG, it already makes a big difference on your approach to the match psychologically. The fact that it is a grand slam final will get to you much more than you know it's not. And the final result will also have a much bigger effect on your mentality. Not that I'm saying Roger will beat Nadal if it's RG final, but a grand slam final is not what a TMS final can ever compare with.
Psychological approach will be different but strategic approach will be the same. This match in Monte Carlo was all about that.


You regard Roger beating Nadal in RG final a miracle? Surely not me.
I explained why. Besides Gaudio was 1-3 vs Coria before their miracle final, Federer is 1-4 vs Nadal.