Why I will be supporting Nadal on Sunday

I've never done it before. I've never yet rooted for Rafa Nadal to in a tennis match, but I will be on Sunday.

Throughout 2011 I was pleased to see Djokovic put Nadal to he sword repeatedly. I took pleasure in seeing the guy who wore people down being worn down. What goes around comes around, I felt.

But this Sunday I'm going to be cheering on Nadal, and not half-heartedly either because there's a lot of reasons for it.

1. Because he deserves his 7th French. That achievement is no flash in the pan, no rush of form, it's because he's got the best game, by miles, for this surface. Fair play, I want him to get his 7.

2. Because it would be bull for the harmonisation of the courts to usher in another Holy Grail type record (look at the routine French/Wimbledon doubles now...). I'm fed up of this development eroding one of the unique aspects of this sport - that to rule on all surfaces meant conquering the specialists on their chosen ground. I don't want this done until the courts have diverged again.

3. Because Djokovic appears to have become a focus for a peculiar type of tennis fan afflicted with nationalism and aggression. It's tough on those who aren't like that but too many are and I don't wish to witness their antics.

4. Speaking of antics, I don't want to witness Djokovic's either. What on Earth is possessing the man who will applaud opponents shots and make calls against himself to celebrate in this way? Doesn't he realise how ridiculous and offensive it is? I don't want to see that on Sunday.

5. Because it means Federer retains a decent chance of getting to #1. He will, remarkably, have lost virtually no ground to Djokovic (2580 to ND, 2080 to RF) through the clay season, and given he only played three events that's pretty handy. A Nadal win keeps the target feasible until after Shanghai.

So Vamos Rafa! (feels very weird doing that)

More or less same sentiments, Nadal is a legend of the game, and he has become humble and more humble with time, I just didnt like Nadal's game style but loved his work ethic passion and will power.

I wanted Nadal to lose to Djokovic in 2011, but not anymore, this guy deserves his attention and I would like to witness the history of 7 GS in FO, thats in my view more remarkable than 4 in a row by Djoko.

4 in a row can be made in 1 year, but for 7 title you have to play that good for 7 years, even great Fed in grass couldn't do it, so it means a great value for me.

Whom ever I rooted for this FO lost, so I would be rooting for Djokovic , sorry Socal and Djoko fans Nadal deserves the title more than anybody.

I think you missed one point:

- Because Socal wants otherwise....just kidding

I think this is a bit delusional kind of post BB. Stick to the mainstream: Fed is getting old and is good to have at least one guy around challenging the Nadull. This wont make him anywhere near the GOAT, which in such a poor quality era of men tennis, very difficultly can be topic of debate.

By 'him' I take I you mean Djokovic? Well for sure GOAT or whatever just isn't on the agenda; call us back at 12 Slams minimum. I do think Nadal deserves this, whatever that means.

If there's a 'Fed' side to this it's point 5; would I prefer to see Nadal stymied or Fed given a chance at #1? No contest, let's see if he can show this era up by doing that.

By the way, Federer is #2 if Nadal loses, so there is that to think about, though Wimbledon won't seed on that basis so no advantage there.

Good I am happy to hear, I am glad that Novak's success can bring Federer fans over to cheering for Nadal. If I was a fed fan I would be cheering for Nadal. Despite Jeremy's silly contention of a weaker era everyone has been talking about the strength of this era watching Mcenroe this week televise the games and he mentioned it over and over again how good this era and these three guys at the top are. Ill take his word on this issue over you Jeremy. You have a dominant number 1, the goat still able to play consistently near his best, and the greatest clay courter of all time.

For me it actually isn't make or break if Novak wins. Like I said I feel as I am playing with the house money and I hope Novak feels that way despite the 4 slams in a row thing. He has gotten to his first final and is playing a heavy favorite. And despite all of this I think he will win. He will do something that even Roger couldn't do at his best and that is what really sticks in Fed fan's craw if he succeeds.

Now for all this nationalistic stuff, I actually don't buy that argument. Novak is the most famous positive serbian figure internationally and he comes from a small country that doesn't have all that switzerland has going for them. It isn't like the serbs are knifing people in the stands like english football fans or anything. Federer fans are oddly the most in your face in every forum I have ever gone to.

I will be supporting Nadal tomorrow because I am a fan. The sort of tennis he has played this week deserves the trophy. Simon Barnes in the Times this morning (PPV) pondered whether with his play Nadal has moved into a "different dimension of excellence". I think he has. Nadal is capable of playing tennis that looks out of this world. When he does so he is unbeatable.

Djokovic could win tomorrow. In sports anything can happen but if he did so the best player wouldn't have won. If Djokovic wins tomorrow he will do so because somehow with houdini like skills he has survived and not because he has played the best tennis. Of course that would deserve admiration but I would be left feeling that Djokovic had got very, very lucky.

I agree with them all except the 1st. Nadal has rarely had to come through a truly difficult draw to win this tournament, possibly due to his high ranking achieved in the transition period. I do not see Djokovic winning even a set, and no amount of inspiration from him will change that. I cannot bring myself to ever being on Nadal's side, no matter who he is playing. His personality and way of playing brings out the worse in me. Federer and DP are the only ones who can take a set off him on this clay.

Good stuff BB, and realise you probably hovered over 'click' before sending it, lol.

I agree with most of the reasons including the nationalistic one. He seems to be the embodiment of patriotism. And to be far Novak has always embraced this...pointing to Serbian sections in the crowd, draping himself with his flag earlier on in his career, actively involved in the setting up of the Serbian Open. It all comes across as rather fanatical...and divisory to the global nature of the sport.

I used to think Federer was the arrogant one but I've since realised its nothing compared to Djokovic. Yes these guys need to have confidence galore to be at the top, but they dont have to overtly show it - that 'Cantona Stare' around the crowd that Djokovic shows each match tells you all you need to know. It's a turn off for neutral watchers of the game by and large and I feel another reason for his narrower fan base. Yes he applauds opponents shots but even there I kind of see it as a gesture of "I the superior player hereby bestow you acknowledgement of a good shot, because it took the best to beat me" type thing. For me Djokovic just doesn't have the X factor.

I also don't care for his brand of tennis...ok people call Nadal boring, etc. Fair enough but I don't agree. It's different to Federer's easy elegance of course. But it's his own brand, unique to him. BUT IMO he has a lot more flair and variety than Djokovic. I thought Ferrerrrr was metronomic but Djokovic has stolen that cap. His modus operandi is to drill winners down the lines after creating a gap through his uber-efficiency. I dont feel this brand of tennis has any uniqueness or flair, it's a little sterile for my liking. All his shots are efficient and look effective but there is nothing special about them. Where's the inspirational shots? Those crazy running winners and passing shots? People may say, what about that USO MP winner? Well that was a hit and hope shot...kind of like the game at 3-0 in 2nd set yesterday where he just decided to swing his racquet and see what happened...and I think it was that moment of successful hit and hope again that so dismayed Roger, he hates that approach (and is also a reason why I think he likes and appreciates Nadal far more), and it brought USO back to him I felt...because he simply wasn't the same afterwards. I wonder if Roger enjoys playing against Djokovic at all...I wonder what Roger really thinks of him and his tennis approach. Penny for his thoughts...

The same surely cant be said for Nadal...as Steve Tignor wrote that last night his movement to and subsequent shots on clay all seem to be one complete motion. Has any one had such natural movement on a surface?

Anyway, these are some of the reasons I also feel Djokovic is not that popular with the French crowd...or why he has a far smaller fan base per se than Nadal or Federer.

Yes I also feel the 4 in a row should remain sacred until the surfaces are divergent again. It's become too easy to dominate all the surfaces for some years now...and I'm sure many of the past greats feel that the lack of variety in the game has made it so. I agree that we should embrace specialists...not snuff them out. Tennis used to be far more interesting as the tour moved from one different surface to another.

HE...I agree. This is Nadal 3.0. Ok Ferrer isn't GOAT material but he was comfortably 2nd/3rd best on clay this year and Nadal simply thrashed him. I'm sure not even Ferrer was expecting that. But then he's thrashed just about everyone else in the draw...losing less games so far than he did in 2008.

If Djokovic wins I will applaud him but it won't make me like the player any more than today.

Personally, I am not bothered who wins and just want to see a cracking tennis match. Whatever happens history is going to be made.

No socal, it's nothing to do with Federer losing or any version of 'Novak under seige' you want to concoct, it's just what I said.

And if you think this is Federer consistently near his best, well I'm afraid you didn't watch much tennis a few years ago.

I'd agree bogbrush that Federer is not at the same level he was a few years ago. However, the same could be levied at Djokovic as in when Fed had his purple patch Novak was not at his best.

Nadal has been my favourite player from the moment I first saw him play.
I came out of "tennis hibernation" after years of Sampras.. then closely followed by Roger. Bjorn Borg had always been my "hero" and here I was faced with a fresh young face who instilled the same excitement in me as Borg had done every time I watched him play. His baseline power game is I know not to everyone´s liking and therefore it was inevitable that the two contrasting styles of Rafa and Roger would create two fan camps. It has been a shame that there has been so much antagonism between the two sets of fans because it surely is not between the two players themselves. I consider myself particularly fortunate that I have watched such talent emerge and go so deep in the APT.
I did not like Novak from the first time I watched him play but gradually as he started to mature I warmed a bit more to him.. sadly the more successfull he has become the more arrogant he has become when I used to believe it was Roger. His Mr Nice Guy act on court does not fool me and in that regard I think he is a faker.
Naturally I am wanting to see Rafa get that No. 7. what a fantastic achievement and one that I think it will be very difficult if not impossible to beat.
Lastly to hear the wonderful things that get said about Rafa from commentators, his peers and representatives of his country is heart warming and I therefore Rafa is so deserving of this win. Bueña Suerte Rafa ..Vamos

CaledonianCraig wrote:I'd agree bogbrush that Federer is not at the same level he was a few years ago. However, the same could be levied at Djokovic as in when Fed had his purple patch Novak was not at his best.

Please don't let's turn this into a GOAT/weak era thread, I was simply correcting socals mistaken assertion that Federer is at his best.

Yes but they were both peak RG11 arguably...and we saw the result then. Federer was so off his game yesterday it was amazing...never seen him hit as many FH UEs before. He even admitted just about that he didn't have anything left in the 3rd set. It was a weird performance...and not as though Djokovic was at top of his game.

No lets not go there but I would agree that this is not Fed at his best. That is why I have a sneaky feeling he has won his last slam. Another slam could come his way if Nadal or Djokovic are removed early doors though but if he continue to meet them at the latter stages I can't see how he will overcome them when he is now not at his best.

CaledonianCraig wrote:No lets not go there but I would agree that this is not Fed at his best. That is why I have a sneaky feeling he has won his last slam. Another slam could come his way if Nadal or Djokovic are removed early doors though but if he continue to meet them at the latter stages I can't see how he will overcome them when he is now not at his best.

Probably, though I'm not ready to give up when this event is on the lowest surface, in slow conditions with - Federers words - very slow balls. There are differnt tournaments out there. But you're probably right, even the US got slowed up and the arduous nature of 5 sets (Nadal and Djokovic nearly killed each other last year) is beyond him now. Maybe they'll not make a mes of the USO like in 2011 (TV companies won't have been happy) and it'll be a bit slicker.
Still good chances at the Masters Cup though.


Anyway, French Open 2012 it is, and I have my bizarre allegiance!

bogbrush wrote:By 'him' I take I you mean Djokovic? Well for sure GOAT or whatever just isn't on the agenda; call us back at 12 Slams minimum. I do think Nadal deserves this, whatever that means.

If there's a 'Fed' side to this it's point 5; would I prefer to see Nadal stymied or Fed given a chance at #1? No contest, let's see if he can show this era up by doing that.

By the way, Federer is #2 if Nadal loses, so there is that to think about, though Wimbledon won't seed on that basis so no advantage there.

Yes I was talking about Djokovic. Personally, I am happy Fed lost yesterday because I'm quite sure he couldn't stand a real chance to win this Nadal on this clay. Instead, there's probably a good chance at Wimbo and USO. I don't get why you think the N.2 ranking would not affect seeds in Wimbledon? Changes in the top seeding are rarely made in Wimbo.

Socal: get real! You believe a 31 years old can perform as strongly as a player in his prime? Please go study some basic tennis stats that I understand aren't your bigger strenght........

I do have a sneaky suspicion Fed can put in a very strong challenge at Wimbledon. If we look at the top two Nadal and Djokovic then neither can lay claim to being all-dominant on grass and I would say that both are probably more at home on hard courts than grass.

I thought this a curious statement from Fed yesterday...
"In the third, I wasn’t able to put a good game together anymore,”
Obviously with a two sets to love lead in particular against Novak it’s not the same match anymore.
He goes for broke and there’s no more fear. That’s about it.”

1. Not able to anymore...?
Whats that mean.....injury? Mentally spent?

2. Obviously...?
Is this saying he doesn't believe he can win where Novakmgets 2 sets leads?

3. Goes for broke...?
This is what I was referring to above, the hit and hope aspect of Novak's game Federer doesn't like.

Interesting set of statements.

Jeremy, Wimbledon have a formula for seeding that doesn't go straight off the rankings.

It's based on ranking plus points over last two years of grass performance.

It was done on the idea that grass was so different toother surfaces. Ronicslly, they only put it in in 2001, and have nice made grass no different!

THEY MAY HAVE TO POSTPONE THE MATCH


http://eurosport.yahoo.com/08062012/58/french-open-men-final-delayed.html

Lydian, probably

1. 'obviously' may refer to him stating the obvious though point 2 probably accounts for a degree of resignation in the third.
2. I suspect he's saying he can't do 5 on clay versus Djokovic
3. Perhaps.

He also mentions in another comment the "very slow balls". He said something similar at the start of the event and probably as soon as he saw them knew this event wasn't going to be great for him.

Haddie...I think they'll squeeze it in.

http://www.accuweather.com/en/fr/paris/623/daily-weather-forecast/623?day=2

Doesn't look too bad....cold though.

BB, so basically does that mean if feds does get the no2 ranking if say nole wins, then it wont make any difference for the seeding as fed's last two outings at sw19 yielded 2 qf's whereas nadal won it in '10 and made the final in '11. Is that right?

I'm ambivalent about the outcome in the final.

As for Roger, overall it was a very good clay season. He gained more points in this clay season than in 2010 and 2011, so that's actually progress.

Clay is undoubtedly his weakest surface, always has been. I think the difference is more stark now than it has ever been, simply because he doesn't have the lateral movement that he once had. However, I don't think he's that much better on grass either. These two surfaces are the two that reward the best movers on tour, especially since the grass plays so slowly nowadays. Indeed by the second week of W it is virtually a clay court.

So I'm not expecting too much at W; I think a semi final appearance would be a good result, unless of course the courts play faster this year than they have in the last four or five years. I doubt this will be the case. With the OG just three weeks after W, the groundsmen will be looking for a durable surface, which probably means even more of the same.

Fed's real chance, and I think it is a realistic chance, will be at the USO, again, provided that the courts are slicker than last year. IMO he is still the best player in the world on fast surfaces, where he can use the full variety in his arsenal. He needs a surface that rewards first strike tennis and allows him to shorten points. Clay has never been that surface and grass no longer is.



emancipator

LuvSports! wrote:BB, so basically does that mean if feds does get the no2 ranking if say nole wins, then it wont make any difference for the seeding as fed's last two outings at sw19 yielded 2 qf's whereas nadal won it in '10 and made the final in '11. Is that right?

I hope not.

That's right Luvsports. Rafa will be seeded two at W regardless of the rankings.

I think the formula they use is: ranking points + 100% of W points from the previous year + 75% of all points from any other grass court events from the previous 2 years (which would include W 2010)

Or something similar. In any case, based on their seeding formula, Rafa is way ahead of Fed.

cheers man, why do they do that?
i mean someone above said it was something about being different by why in particular that system? seems a shame. maybe i am a weee bit too partial.

Go Rafa Go.

Any Federer fan who supports Nadal to victory should seriously stop supporting Federer. Bogbrush you went from salivating Djoker after he beats Nadal in 3 slam finals to hoping he loses the next. You are a player hopper my friend. At the very least you should not care who wins, not change every grand slam.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Any Federer fan who supports Nadal to victory should seriously stop supporting Federer. Bogbrush you went from salivating Djoker after he beats Nadal in 3 slam finals to hoping he loses the next. You are a player hopper my friend. At the very least you should not care who wins, not change every grand slam.

Well I never saw this as any kind of heavy thing, and I'm not suddenly a big fan of Nadals tennis, I just think credit where's it due in this case.
The big thing or me is the cheapening of Holy Grails. French / Wimbledons are easy now as they're closer in conditions than ever, and the sames happened to the four Slams. The way it was in the 90's would have takenSuperman to win all a once!

I said in my article I was happy Djokovic won those, the only thing about him is he's become this absurd figure ripping his shirt off and posing like a right Holly t1t

Interesting article!
Interesting to see some of the Fed fans now supporting Nadal, to be fair from what I heard in the press conference he will be behind Nadal too.

I wonder who the French crowd will be supporting...

lydian wrote:I used to think Federer was the arrogant one but I've since realised its nothing compared to Djokovic. Yes these guys need to have confidence galore to be at the top, but they dont have to overtly show it - that 'Cantona Stare' around the crowd that Djokovic shows each match tells you all you need to know. It's a turn off for neutral watchers of the game by and large and I feel another reason for his narrower fan base. Yes he applauds opponents shots but even there I kind of see it as a gesture of "I the superior player hereby bestow you acknowledgement of a good shot, because it took the best to beat me" type thing. For me Djokovic just doesn't have the X factor.

The Catona Stare is just a showing of fighting spirit, not arrogance. Even if it was arrogance, your idol Nadal, falling on his knees while double fist pumping with the facial expressions of an epileptic bull, doesn't do much better. I wonder what people on TV nowadays have to do to not be perceived arrogant by someone. One wrong look in there eyes and it's already wrong. I guess they have to look like a smurf if they don't want to come over arrogant.

I understand the sentiment of the thread BB although I imagine it must be a bit weird to support Djokovic for the last 3 slam matches and then go to supporting Nadal. It would seem alien to me, after supporting Djokovic in those finals to go to supporting Nadal. I'll stick with supporting Djokovic, but unlike in previous encounters in the slams between the two, I'm not as concerned over the outcome. I'll still watch the match but my only desire is for an actual competitive match @ RG for once and my sincere hope it goes to 5 sets. At least that way we may compare it to Fed's challenge by Nadal in Wimbledon '08 and consider this in the same light, especially if it's a classic, close 5 sets. Anything less would be a bit of a downer and in some ways would be unfortunate because no one's really pushed Nadal hard in RG, whereas being pushed hard is good and if Nadal does succeed he will be the worthier winner for it. Also makes for a more watchable slam final, which I don't think we can really say the French Open is known for!

If I watch the final I'll support Djokovic cause Nadal has already won far enough for his limited talents.

luciusmann wrote:I understand the sentiment of the thread BB although I imagine it must be a bit weird to support Djokovic for the last 3 slam matches and then go to supporting Nadal. It would seem alien to me, after supporting Djokovic in those finals to go to supporting Nadal. I'll stick with supporting Djokovic, but unlike in previous encounters in the slams between the two, I'm not as concerned over the outcome. I'll still watch the match but my only desire is for an actual competitive match @ RG for once and my sincere hope it goes to 5 sets. At least that way we may compare it to Fed's challenge by Nadal in Wimbledon '08 and consider this in the same light, especially if it's a classic, close 5 sets. Anything less would be a bit of a downer and in some ways would be unfortunate because no one's really pushed Nadal hard in RG, whereas being pushed hard is good and if Nadal does succeed he will be the worthier winner for it. Also makes for a more watchable slam final, which I don't think we can really say the French Open is known for!

Lucius
I have a feeling the Fed fans are now divided between Djoko and Nadal.

lydian wrote:... that 'Cantona Stare' around the crowd that Djokovic shows each match tells you all you need to know. ...

To be fair to Djokovic he would probably explain it as follows: "When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea."

Personally, although I think Nadal is the clear favorite I am hoping for a highly competitive match. I am thinking it could go either of two ways 1) Djokovic looks lack-lustre and doesn't appear to put up much of a fight or 2) Djokovic looks "up for it" and it ends up being a long match, with lots of scrambling, grunting and ooo yaaaaaarrrrrrrr!!! fist pumps.

I agree Nore.

It could be anticlimactic if the real Djoker doesn't turn up.

If however, the Djoker of 2011 shows up, it's gonna be a war.

I think the latter is more likely going by the last 5 slams.

People need to remember the significance of the surface. Clay is Nadal's surface that he has ruled like nobody else has in tennis history whilst for Djokovic it is his weakest surface I would say. It would not be a surprise for me if Nadal won in three tightish sets. Djoko's recent ownership of Rafa holds no water on this surface.

Federer doesn't really care if Nadal wins or loses. He doesn't like losing to Murray or Nole, so he's probably cursing Nole privately, but he doesn't like Nadal that much.

JM, true thought Fed has a better relation with Nadal, no matter their rivalry.

I am not a fan of Nadal, and my second in list is Murray, thought I consider Nadal as the original power tennis guy and Djoko a complete copy of him, who made it last year into the top, doing a few things better then Nadal, mainly stamina.

Djoko does not bring anything new to the tennis to be liked. If I liked that kind of tennis, I'd rather watch Nadal.

It Must Be Love wrote: I have a feeling the Fed fans are now divided between Djoko and Nadal.

I agree, Fed fans are divided. Which probably leads to a more balanced forum at the moment because I'd say there is probably a slight majority of Fed fan posters compared to posters supporting other players (Nadal or Murray or others).

I agree CC that clay makes this surface tough for Djokovic, however, I think if Nadal wins tomorrow, it will be in 4 sets and if it goes to 5, Djokovic will win. That's my view. Even as it is now, I think Djokovic is only slightly more likely to win (51 to 49), not more than that and only if goes to 5 sets. People may be reading perhaps too much into the mental dynamic which I think is less at play this year than last year. Even when you take that into account, you'd think Nadal would win in 4 but I don't think things will prove as easier as it appears. Often when Djokovic plays Nadal, it seems as if Djokovic can break at will, which we seen repeatedly in his matches against other players, including Fed but also Tsonga in a few days too. This could be because he's a great returner or because he believes he can always get into the set/match, hard to say.

I agree with the thrust of your post Jahu, Fed I feel ascribes too much to luck with his losses to Djokovic, whereas what Djokovic is perhaps doing more is showing guts (in my view). Denying that Djokovic is winning because he is taking his chances is what I feel marks the difference between Djokovic and Federer and why the former has had so many successes with Nadal. Djokovic realises that with Nadal, you must take your chances and he said that after his Rome defeat by Nadal. Fed had chances yesterday but he didn't take them and you sense if Fed had taken that second set we would have seen a different match. That's the difference, Fed had his chances last year against Nadal in the first set but you know Djokovic would have taken that set in the same position Fed found himself in that 8th game. Hence why I think if Djokovic listens to what he already knows, he will take his chances and draw the match out and if he does that and takes it to 5 sets, he wins. Anything less and I'm certain Nadal will win. It would take a total Nadal meltdown for Djokovic to win in any less than 5 sets and I don't think we'll see that from Nadal (we haven't seen that in the other slam this year).

Chydremion wrote:

lydian wrote:I used to think Federer was the arrogant one but I've since realised its nothing compared to Djokovic. Yes these guys need to have confidence galore to be at the top, but they dont have to overtly show it - that 'Cantona Stare' around the crowd that Djokovic shows each match tells you all you need to know. It's a turn off for neutral watchers of the game by and large and I feel another reason for his narrower fan base. Yes he applauds opponents shots but even there I kind of see it as a gesture of "I the superior player hereby bestow you acknowledgement of a good shot, because it took the best to beat me" type thing. For me Djokovic just doesn't have the X factor.

The Catona Stare is just a showing of fighting spirit, not arrogance. Even if it was arrogance, your idol Nadal, falling on his knees while double fist pumping with the facial expressions of an epileptic bull, doesn't do much better. I wonder what people on TV nowadays have to do to not be perceived arrogant by someone. One wrong look in there eyes and it's already wrong. I guess they have to look like a smurf if they don't want to come over arrogant.

I am convinced that Nadull´s uncle owns a big bull farm and he organizes bull fights. His nephew must have looked at them a quite a lot to catch some big things from them

The only point I can agree on is the first one where you want to give Rafa his dues for having the best clay game and maybe also your last point. The rest I can't really see where you're coming from at least not enough to change to supporting Nadal. I want Novak to win because I prefer his game to Nadal's. As far as the holy grail achievement goes and Novak being unworthy, if you're going to look at things from that perspective then you'd have to respect Novak for stopping Rafa from overhauling Feds slam total especially as I suspect you feel Rafa's game is not worthy of that. Seeing as Novak was the only one capable then what's wrong with him getting his place in history?

I don't feel gratitude to any of them except for the entertainment they bring me. Hence my favouritism to Federer. Certainly not for any blocking done on another's behalf.

The post recently wiped from this tread illustrate point 3.

I'm not a fan of Nadals game, but neither do I find Djokovic at all inspiring. He's just as much a product of technology changes as anyone and if there's anything amazing about his game it's the athleticism. I can get that in any sport, I watch tennis for the stuff McEnroe or Federer do.

bogbrush wrote:No socal, it's nothing to do with Federer losing or any version of 'Novak under seige' you want to concoct, it's just what I said.

And if you think this is Federer consistently near his best, well I'm afraid you didn't watch much tennis a few years ago.

Yes on clay I watched Nadal wipe the floor with him giving him 6-1 sets regularly a few years ago. He didn't play any worse on the clay than he played in 2005 or 2006. i don't know why Roger fails to win a grandslam in his 30s like Agassi and Sampras were capable of doing, maybe he wishes he could play Andy Roddick again in the final of a slam.

Chydremion wrote: The Catona Stare is just a showing of fighting spirit, not arrogance. Even if it was arrogance, your idol Nadal, falling on his knees while double fist pumping with the facial expressions of an epileptic bull, doesn't do much better. I wonder what people on TV nowadays have to do to not be perceived arrogant by someone. One wrong look in there eyes and it's already wrong. I guess they have to look like a smurf if they don't want to come over arrogant.

Epileptic bull...lol.
I thought Smurf-Tennis had been introduced by Tiriac at Madrid?

Socal, Sampras/Agassi didn't have a Nadal or Djokovic to deal with towards the end of their career.
Plus Sampras still had that huge weapon, the serve, which carried him to victory in 2002.
His 2nd serve had an av. speed of 118mph that USO and they used to measure it above the net then!
Imagine facing that...it was probably near Djokovic's 1st serve speed...makes him nigh on impossible to break on fast HC.
Federer as good as he still is simply doesnt have a weapon that can carry him through gameslike that, nor do the surfaces assist him.

Yeah, Lydian you find Novak's glare to be arrogant please. Nadal is the king of the stare down and the fist pump. He is also the king of celebrating points like he just won the gold medal. And at least Novak goes up the line to hit winners instead of endless cross court forehands repeated over and over again.

I am glad Novak embraces his people and can be a hero to them. The serbian fans are little loud and boisterous I haven't seen them do anything really violent, nasty, or damaging to the game. Is chanting and flag wave insulting for other players and their fans tough. If Novak was Iranian and he was winning then you guys would see some boisterous fans.


Part of the reason I like Novak is because he isn't popular and bandwagon like Nadal and Federer. So it is wonderful that BB and lydian will be cheering on their man Nadal. But their arguments to the effect that Novak if he wins 4 in a row is not worthy of the sacred record because of the similarity of the surfaces is basically laughable. This BB the guy who thinks that swindler ceos who defraud people of money are worth the money they get because I quote they are smart enough to get paid. If Novak can pull off the upset and get paid you can bet no one will buy your silly sacred 4 in a row argument. Where is Tenez that was maybe the second most ridiculous thing I have ever heard on 606v2.

socal1976 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:No socal, it's nothing to do with Federer losing or any version of 'Novak under seige' you want to concoct, it's just what I said.

And if you think this is Federer consistently near his best, well I'm afraid you didn't watch much tennis a few years ago.

Yes on clay I watched Nadal wipe the floor with him giving him 6-1 sets regularly a few years ago. He didn't play any worse on the clay than he played in 2005 or 2006. i don't know why Roger fails to win a grandslam in his 30s like Agassi and Sampras were capable of doing, maybe he wishes he could play Andy Roddick again in the final of a slam.

I saw Federer give Nadal one of those in a RG final too. You think that would happen now? Lol

Oh dear, still trying anything you can to promote dear Noles position? Even trying to pretend that Federer (who lost to Roddick this year, did you see?) hasn't slowed at almost 31 from 26.