Federer-Nadal one for the ages... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer-Nadal one for the ages...

Ace Tracker
03-29-2004, 03:52 AM
if its gonna be on TV, record it, if you do not have it, try to find it... this is one of the matches that should go down in history as one of the finest displays of exuberant technique and shotmaking that two players can ever produce on a tennis court... Rafael's fearless groundstrokes are a cyclone of fresh air that descended upon Key Biscayne to deodorize all the stale wave of tentative tennis away... He may be only 17, but he has surely graduated from being the future of the game to being an actual contender... now!

Tennis Fool
03-29-2004, 03:55 AM
AT, are you in Miami ?

Kiara
03-29-2004, 03:55 AM
Rahr! Maybe now people will stop mistaking him for someone's hitting partner :rolleyes:

Yonge
03-29-2004, 04:00 AM
Thanks for the tip. I'm in Canada though so you know what that means.

faboozadoo15
03-29-2004, 04:31 AM
one for the ages-- what are you on???

great shotmaking-- sure, from one person. a lot of them should make a highlights reel or something.

J. Corwin
03-29-2004, 05:02 AM
I don't know about it being one for the ages.

WyveN
03-29-2004, 05:10 AM
I don't see how this could be one for the ages - those matches are generally classics.

For a player to really arive he needs to win a big title, not get one win. For example federer beat Sampras back in 2001, but he didn't follow it up so he didn't really arrive until Wimbledon 2003.

darnyelb
03-29-2004, 05:11 AM
So sad Roger's out, but very proud of the kid.

Tennis Fool
03-29-2004, 05:15 AM
Still Fed beating Pete at Wimbledon *was* one for the ages. This one, no, because Roger isn't yet a legend. Fed and Rafa are at the beginning of their careers and might eventually be seen more as rivals instead of Rafa being "the next Fed".

¿esquímaux?
03-29-2004, 05:19 AM
Who the hell is the ages and why do they always get only one? :scratch:

faboozadoo15
03-29-2004, 06:05 AM
haha! ages doesn't want this one
he/she has much higher standards...

Chloe le Bopper
03-29-2004, 06:16 AM
Rahr! Maybe now people will stop mistaking him for someone's hitting partner :rolleyes:
Or Coria :rolleyes:

WyveN
03-29-2004, 06:44 AM
Still Fed beating Pete at Wimbledon *was* one for the ages.

Then Bastl v Sampras was one for the ages as well

Dirk
03-29-2004, 06:49 AM
No Wvreyn because Pete's streak was over at that point although it was a 5 setter too. Difference is Roger and Pete played great in their match.

WyveN
03-29-2004, 07:05 AM
Pete did not play great in that match, certainly by Pete standards. Don't forget that he needed 5 sets to beat a English man in a earlier round.
And Bastls win was just as impressive as Roger's as Pete still won a slam after that meaning he wasn't totally washed up

Dirk
03-29-2004, 08:05 AM
Um yes Pete did play great in that match. Winners and Error ratio was very good for both men. Pete wasted his 3rd guy so he was over that 2nd rd hump.

WyveN
03-29-2004, 09:42 AM
Um yes Pete did play great in that match. Winners and Error ratio was very good for both men. Pete wasted his 3rd guy so he was over that 2nd rd hump.

Winners and errors ratio?
I am assuming you talking about unforced errors to winners ratio?
When a player serve volleys virtually all the errors are counted as forced so the statistic isn't very telling on grass.
Pete played well but he was far from great, watch 99 Wimb final.

J. Corwin
03-29-2004, 11:03 AM
Man, I need to watch that 99 Wim final. I heard and read that Pete "walked on water".

Billabong
03-29-2004, 11:10 AM
lol;)!

Havok
03-29-2004, 12:47 PM
looking at the numbers, it isn't one for the ages :retard:

Action Jackson
03-29-2004, 12:53 PM
Maybe some people were complaining that Federer hadn't been beaten in ages.

Pea
03-29-2004, 02:05 PM
Thanks for the headsup!^_^

yanchr
03-29-2004, 03:28 PM
One for ages? must be joking...

Roger comparing this one for Nadal with his win over Sampras

Q. I guess this win for him tonight must feel, in a way, like it felt for you when you beat Sampras, that sort of major victory, that major breakthrough. How important is that kind of victory to your career?

ROGER FEDERER: For me, it was -- I think it's -- I don't know if you can compare. Mine was in Wimbledon, you know. Definitely this is also big tournament, but, I don't know, it's tough because I'm still not much, much older than he is. Sampras, for me, was more of -- I think more than I am for him. He's got different idols, I think (smiling). For me, I think this win counts little bit different for us.

I think I'm safe to suppose that Roger thought his Sampras match meant much more to him than this one for Nadal. Though this one is big, just can't paralell Wimbly, the center court, the crowd, the 5-set match, against Sampras, a living legend, end to his Wimbly winning streak...despite that Sampras was just down his way.

Roger has not established his dynasty yet not like Sampras...so one of ages? No...

Shy
03-29-2004, 08:28 PM
Roger is like 22 and Rafa 17. This one isn't for the age.I mean they probably are going to be rivals for the next 7-10 years.

Ace Tracker
03-29-2004, 10:48 PM
for all those who are complaining Federer didnt play well, well, I happened to be there and watched the whole match live, how many of you can say the same before throwing silly accusations just because your fav lost? I just said for the ages because if you happen to have the opportunity to record this match, please do so, Nadal played that brilliantly... years from now, this match will be known as the one when Rafael really made his splash on the Tour, kinda like when Andy beat Sampras in Miami or Roger over Pete in Wimbledon... now you can all say that those were not their best matches by far, but one cannot deny the importance of those results towards building their confidence...

faboozadoo15
03-29-2004, 10:59 PM
usually matches u see in person look incredible no matter what if you don't get to see many of them...

it's a great win for nadal, no doubt. but it's not going in the history books or anything-- like "one for the ages" would...

*SKYE*
04-12-2004, 09:49 AM
Nadals only 17 and shows great tennis talent. He can go far, I reckon possibly world #1 in a few years dont u all think?

castle007
09-15-2008, 04:49 PM
blast from the past!!!

finishingmove
09-15-2008, 04:54 PM
not much of a rivalry here, nadal owns him completely

The_Nadal_effect
09-15-2008, 05:25 PM
Such fun to read this thread. Nice bump!

Nice to see how many people got it right. I hadn't begun following Rafa till summer '05.

groundstroke
09-15-2008, 08:44 PM
Such fun to read this thread. Nice bump!

Nice to see how many people got it right. I hadn't begun following Rafa till summer '05.
Many people (on this forum) predicted Nadal to go away after Federer defeated him in 5 in 2005, if you want to have fun reading a thread, try and find it..

The_Nadal_effect
09-16-2008, 04:54 PM
Many people (on this forum) predicted Nadal to go away after Federer defeated him in 5 in 2005, if you want to have fun reading a thread, try and find it..

:lol: Interestingly, the same lot also predicted he wouldn't make it to another Wimbledon final after '06.

Rafa's an absurd character. Not suitable for logical analysis, no?

:devil:

BTW, I'll check the Miami 05 thread. ;)

SheepleBuster
09-16-2008, 04:57 PM
if its gonna be on TV, record it, if you do not have it, try to find it... this is one of the matches that should go down in history as one of the finest displays of exuberant technique and shotmaking that two players can ever produce on a tennis court... Rafael's fearless groundstrokes are a cyclone of fresh air that descended upon Key Biscayne to deodorize all the stale wave of tentative tennis away... He may be only 17, but he has surely graduated from being the future of the game to being an actual contender... now!

I got to admit. This was one for the ages. I remember it like it was yesterday. Baby Rafa battling Godzilla Federer and beating him for two and 9/10th of the third set before that blown call. Roger put a beat-down on him though. I wish that would've happened at Wimbledon this year but Roger never looked like winning that match except when he had that one break point.

ballbasher101
09-16-2008, 05:09 PM
:lol: Interestingly, the same lot also predicted he wouldn't make it to another Wimbledon final after '06.

Rafa's an absurd character. Not suitable for logical analysis, no?

:devil:

BTW, I'll check the Miami 05 thread. ;)

Mentally Nadal is the strongest player that I have ever seen. Nadal can easily be classified as a weapon of mass destruction on the mental side because he grinds everyone down to the ground.

moonlightdance
09-16-2008, 05:14 PM
so fun to read all the old posts! interesting predictions and interesting to see how things have gone so far. i guess rafa hasn't done too bad for himself 4 years later...

BlueSwan
09-16-2008, 05:27 PM
I got to admit. This was one for the ages. I remember it like it was yesterday. Baby Rafa battling Godzilla Federer and beating him for two and 9/10th of the third set before that blown call. Roger put a beat-down on him though. I wish that would've happened at Wimbledon this year but Roger never looked like winning that match except when he had that one break point.
No, that was the 2005 Miami meeting, this thread is about the 2004 Miami meeting where Rafa won.

LinkMage
09-16-2008, 11:43 PM
No, that was the 2005 Miami meeting, this thread is about the 2004 Miami meeting where Rafa won.


Yes, Nadull only won because Fed was suffering from a fever and a heatstroke.

Ten_Isse_Fan
09-17-2008, 12:50 AM
Yes, Nadull only won because Fed was suffering from a fever and a heatstroke.
It was mono :p