[SelvenluvJo]

Sampras on the mental dynamic of Federer’s matches against Nadal: “It seems Roger gets a little discouraged if what he’s trying isn’t working. It seems like he starts to press a little bit, starts to miss a little bit. Rafa’s one of those players that, his level will stay the same the whole match, he just plays one speed, one way. If Roger plays really well, I think he beats Rafa; I think if he plays pretty well, I think Rafa beats him. I just think, you can’t take any time off against Rafa.

“You can’t lose your composure, you can’t be frustrated, because the next thing you know you’ll be down break point. Roger’s game is suited against Rafa because he flattens it out, he is willing to come in, he mixes it up, changes the speed and I think, it just seems like if there’s a five-minute span in the match, Rafa’s going to be right there and Roger can get a little bit down, you can sort of dig yourself a bit of a hole. I’ve seen that happen a little bit. But listen, I am a huge fan of those two guys, and it’s a pleasure watching them play.”

http://www.thetennisspace.com/opinio...n-on-himself/?


sorry I'm not a good English user, what the meaning of "dig himself a hole"? He already have has a one ,why should he dig another?sounds porny

[Time Violation]

Lol, it means to get into trouble

[70-68]

Sampras doesn't say anything new there. There are a few players who can outplay Nadal even on clay, but no one can keep that high level up for three sets. When the opponent's level drops, which is almost always expected, Nadal gets in control.

[habibko]

Originally Posted by 70-68

Sampras doesn't say anything new there. There are a few players who can outplay Nadal even on clay, but no one can keep that high level up for three sets. When the opponent's level drops, which is almost always expected, Nadal gets in control.

exactly, everyone knows Federer's highest level cannot be stopped by Nadal or any player for that matter no matter how well they play, but since his decline in 2007 the matches where Federer has maintained his highest level for the full duration of a match have been scarce

not to mention his highest level right now isn't what it used to be, mainly in terms of movement

[Time Violation]

Nadal stopped him plenty of times before 2007

[thrust]

Originally Posted by habibko

exactly, everyone knows Federer's highest level cannot be stopped by Nadal or any player for that matter no matter how well they play, but since his decline in 2007 the matches where Federer has maintained his highest level for the full duration of a match have been scarce

not to mention his highest level right now isn't what it used to be, mainly in terms of movement

Roger did not decline in 07, he finally had to deal with another great player in Nadal. Great players usually do not decline or burn out by age 25, Borg being the exception.

[Fireballer]

Originally Posted by habibko

exactly, everyone knows Federer's highest level cannot be stopped by Nadal or any player for that matter no matter how well they play, but since his decline in 2007 the matches where Federer has maintained his highest level for the full duration of a match have been scarce

not to mention his highest level right now isn't what it used to be, mainly in terms of movement

Federer's highest level on clay was always stopped by Nadal.Stop talking shit

[Sophocles]

Originally Posted by thrust

Roger did not decline in 07, he finally had to deal with another great player in Nadal. Great players usually do not decline or burn out by age 25, Borg being the exception.

Actually at 26 most (Open-era) great players start showing signs of decline. This is true of Sampras, Borg obviously, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, McEnroe, Connors (despite a very soft landing), Nastase, as well as Federer. Federer was "dealing with" - & losing to - Nadal from 2004 onwards.

[Shirogane]

I'm not saying he's right but I think they all misunderstood habibko's post anyway.