Lukas Rosol

First topic message reminder :

You sir are my hero!

What a match, what great hitting, where was Nadal?

Whatever Nadal did, Rosol gave him the metaphorical middle finger with his brilliant play.

Rosol himself said that Nadal apologised 3 times straight afterwards, so even if it was intentional he made things right straight away.

So it's not an issue. Nadal was rattled, may have lost his cool, but redeemed himself immediately.

I think there's a big difference between soderling & Rosol in terms of performance and expectation. Soderling's been a no.4 and has won a haul of titles, whereas Rosol is 26 achieved nothing never been past the 3rd round of any GS.....i think there's grounds to be suspicious. That's all.

No reason to be suspicious at all. Drugs don't make anyone perform to an almost superhuman level. That is to say they won't turn a 100 ranked player into the new Goran, There is no such pill that will make you that much better
they just help you train harder.

Rosol had an absolute birthday out there. Nothing to do with any magic potion.

Rosol wa superb yesterday, I wouldn't know a lot about tennis but would watch it often enough. It seemed to me he played with a nice combination of power and finesse. But I also think he gambled and went for it ,not like some who would kind of go damage limitation against the better palyers. Rosol went for shots that would usually be low percentage and credit to him he made a great deal of them. Well played fella.

Lets us leaved PEDs and medical supplements aside. Rosol played well and his aggression paid off.

Federer did the same at WTF and won. Not very different.

BTW, Soderling took Nadal to five sets at W in 2007, and did not have many titles before that. He had lost the previous week to Nadal 6-1,6-0, IIRC, but beat him at FO 2009.

Rosol played a tremendous match and deserves the credit. Let us not taint his win with unfounded insinuations.

The three sets that Rosol won (6-4 x 3), remind me of the Federer v Tsonga match with Federer up two sets to love, and then did not see a BP.

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2012-06-29/201206151339767429603.html

There are two types of dopinig that would potentially be beneficial to tennis:
1 - Blood manipulation (EPO and derivatives / transfusions) that increase stamina by improving the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood
2 - Steroids or HGH, to increase muscle mass and power.

For the Rosol v Nadal match, stamina wasn't an issue, as although it was a 5 set match it wasn't particularly long, and the majority of points were short (Rosol either hitting a winner or an error after 5 shots or less). He certainly didn't win by out-lasting Rafa.

Steroids? Well, I've seen some allegations about their use in tennis, but Rosol certainly didn't look like the classic physique of someone artificially 'bulked up'. Indeed, to me he looked relatively lean and lithe. Long levers and a fast racket, allied to putting everything and the kitchen sink into his shots (especially the backhand) was what generated the pace.

As Lydian said, after a freakishly good performance like that, I hope Rosol went out and bought himself a couple of lottery tickets as well - he'll rarely if ever have a better day.

John wrote:I think there's a big difference between soderling & Rosol in terms of performance and expectation. Soderling's been a no.4 and has won a haul of titles, whereas Rosol is 26 achieved nothing never been past the 3rd round of any GS.....i think there's grounds to be suspicious. That's all.

Look at the circumstances though, Rosol hasn't got past qualifying for the last 3 or 4 years @ Wimbledon. His results have improved steadily (not by much admittedly) at the slams. He wanted to play well and he looked like the sort of guy who really wanted to show what he was capable of, after all, first time on centre court, the Mecca of the tennis world and against one of the giants of the game. He played unlike so many other underdogs with fearless tennis and wasn't intimidated by the arena or the player. He played with his heart, unlike so many players who play against Nadal.

I tuned in to the match just after Nadal held serve and it went into a tie breaker in the first set. I sensed that this would be a intriguing encounter when the tie breaker was kept competitive by Rosol. I expected a Belucci'esque tie breaker with Nadal taking it 7-0. I realised then that Rosol might not fold immediately like so many opponents before him. My judgement isn't always correct, I thought Djokovic could come back and defeat Nadal after play was suspended @ RG earlier this month but was wrong. However, this time I was correct and I was rewarded with a great match. I would watch slam finals regardless of the players in them (at the time or soon after). There wasn't much incentive to continue watching this match after the first set but sometimes your gut instinct can be right!

Looking at the circumstances, it seems absurd to suggest he was on drugs. It's well attested that players are reaching their peak slightly later than in the past. One thing which many posters haven't commented on is that Nadal and Rosol have never played each other before which means that Nadal may well have found it difficult to read Rosol's serve and game. Hence why Nadal looked so forlorn after being broken in that fifth set after Rosol held. It felt like the Fed vs Tsonga match last year all over. All Fed would have need to win was probably set 3 or 4 going to a tie breaker. That's all Nadal needed too I think, set 2 or 3 going to a tie breaker.

Sport is full of shock results like this, but because someone beats Fudpiece Nadal then there must be grounds for suspicion.
The only time when you can guarantee no shock is when England play one of the real big teams

super_realist wrote:Sport is full of shock results like this, but because someone beats Fudpiece Nadal then there must be grounds for suspicion.
The only time when you can guarantee no shock is when England play one of the real big teams

... or when Scotland play one of the mediocre ones ...

John wrote:I think there's a big difference between soderling & Rosol in terms of performance and expectation. Soderling's been a no.4 and has won a haul of titles, whereas Rosol is 26 achieved nothing never been past the 3rd round of any GS.....i think there's grounds to be suspicious. That's all.

Really?

Nadal was 1-1000 to beat Soderling.

That expectation is what I like to call 'Not a chance in hell'

There was a rumour going round that Soderling's serving a silent suspension as we speak.

He has mono reckoner and he is very much not over it either. I would hate to see him go the way of Ancic

Well that's the rumour - that mono is cover for the suspension. Would have thought Soderling an unlikely candidate for that sort of thing, personally.

But yeah do hope he doesn't go the way of Ancic I completely agree.

Rosol has no muscles John.

Steroids would atleast give him some popping veins on the arms.

Mono unfortunately doesn't have a 'preferred' candidate to affect, though I think Soderling performance wise wasn't playing well before he took his time off from the court to recover.

He has a child on the way so his comeback may be even more difficult with night time nappy changes

legendkillarV2 wrote:Mono unfortunately doesn't have a 'preferred' candidate to affect, though I think Soderling performance wise wasn't playing well before he took his time off from the court to recover.

He has a child on the way so his comeback may be even more difficult with night time nappy changes

dude, I meant the silent suspension stuff, not the mono!

reckoner wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Mono unfortunately doesn't have a 'preferred' candidate to affect, though I think Soderling performance wise wasn't playing well before he took his time off from the court to recover.

He has a child on the way so his comeback may be even more difficult with night time nappy changes

dude, I meant the silent suspension stuff, not the mono!

But do elaborate. What is rumour?

legendkillarV2 wrote:

reckoner wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Mono unfortunately doesn't have a 'preferred' candidate to affect, though I think Soderling performance wise wasn't playing well before he took his time off from the court to recover.

He has a child on the way so his comeback may be even more difficult with night time nappy changes

dude, I meant the silent suspension stuff, not the mono!

But do elaborate. What is rumour?

Kinda said it above, really... the rumour was that Soderling was using mono as cover for a suspension, the inferrence was that it was to do with PEDs. There was a female player who went off radar for a while and the same was said about her - though no mono was involved.

Probably a load of nonsense whipped up by some sobbing Nadal fangirl, lol.

reckoner wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

reckoner wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Mono unfortunately doesn't have a 'preferred' candidate to affect, though I think Soderling performance wise wasn't playing well before he took his time off from the court to recover.

He has a child on the way so his comeback may be even more difficult with night time nappy changes

dude, I meant the silent suspension stuff, not the mono!

But do elaborate. What is rumour?

Kinda said it above, really... the rumour was that Soderling was using mono as cover for a suspension, the inferrence was that it was to do with PEDs. There was a female player who went off radar for a while and the same was said about her - though no mono was involved.

Probably a load of nonsense whipped up by some sobbing Nadal fangirl, lol.

Talk about stirring the pot

You could onto something here.

Lol...where would this forum be without Nadal to talk about....

Well, if people didn't go on (and on) about what an incredibly sporting chap he is perhaps I'd be less irritated by the obvious hypocrisy.

I think Nadal's a force of nature on clay - but off the red stuff he resorts to pretty pathetic behaviour to win matches. Loo break at match point down. Bumping opponent. Arguing with the umpire. Complaining about opponent's breathing. Threatening to boycott tournaments, etc etc. Add to this his constant rule breaking and yeah it is entirely unsurprising that he gets discussed on tennis forums!

Majority only talk about Nadal because of his gamesmanship/off putting behaviour Lydian.

Am also sick of the TV commentators fawning over him likes it's 2008 and forgetting the things he does to annoy opponents.

Well, if people didn't go on (and on) about what an incredibly sporting chap he is

Man. Just stop assuming these people are being honest. I think they are trolling when they write such guff.

You know what? What goes up must come down.

Let's see how Nadal handles the tail end of his career, if this year is anything to go by, it won't be pretty.

Do we have any psychologists on this forum?

Can they explain why when a tennis player loses a match, that player is criticised more loudly and more repetitively for bearing certain perceived characteristics, than he would receive if he had won the match?

Is that really so puzzling?

reckoner wrote: if this year is anything to go by, it won't be pretty.

Yes terrible year this has been, so terrible that before Wimby he was the leader in ATP race (points won this season).
Did you watch the match Reckoner? I was at the stadium and I know how well Rosol played- beyond belief. But don't let that put you off, just stay in your armchair with a printout of the ITF stats page and continue speculating

Certainly did watch it thanks for asking.

You're doing a little speculating yourself in your post. What a colourful little picture you paint!

What have I speculated exactly?
You said Nadal's decline this year has 'not been pretty.' He is currently number 1 in the Race Tour.

Yes yesterday he lost, this is also not speculation. But Rosol earned it, he deserved to win. It wasn't a case of Rafa playing really poorly at all, perhaps from your TV you couldn't appreciate how well Rosol was playing.
Nadal will be back, despite the people who have continuously speculated for years and years he is gone now, Rafa is a fighter.

Well worth watching the interview with Nadal. Pretty positive response from Nadal and he handled the questioning well. BBC have put together a good sequence of the interview and match.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18645470

Nore Staat wrote:Do we have any psychologists on this forum?

Can they explain why when a tennis player loses a match, that player is criticised more loudly and more repetitively for bearing certain perceived characteristics, than he would receive if he had won the match?

For every bandwagon jumping sycophant who love the likes of Nadal and Woods, there are those who like to see them lose. Not too difficult a concept.

I find it difficult to say exactly why you like a player or rather there are often fewer reasons but much easier to think of reasons for not liking someone, and there are a lot of reasons to dislike Nadal.

It Must Be Love wrote:What have I speculated exactly?
You said Nadal's decline this year has 'not been pretty.' He is currently number 1 in the Race Tour.

Yes yesterday he lost, this is also not speculation. But Rosol earned it, he deserved to win. It wasn't a case of Rafa playing really poorly at all, perhaps from your TV you couldn't appreciate how well Rosol was playing.
Nadal will be back, despite the people who have continuously speculated for years and years he is gone now, Rafa is a fighter.

Well you were painting quite a vivid if imaginary portrait of me in an armchair with ITF scorecards.

Let me rephrase the post you took such exception to. I see this year as being an indicator for how Nadal deals with (inevitable) decline and despite all this BS about him being a great gentleman etc etc etc what I've seen this year is petulance and gracelessness. What I've seen thus far is Nadal in adversity does not make a pretty sight. Clearer? Or do you still think I'm "speculating".

It's difficult to ascertain a decline to be honest, reckoner. If we're going to talk about a decline, it's on other surfaces and even then that doesn't preclude him from winning the occasional slam off clay. Fed has won slams off his favourite surface grass @ Wimbledon.

Thus I can see Nadal winning another 1-2 slams @ RG where he is very comfortable and that takes him to 12 or 13. I can certainly see him winning another one off clay, so he could end up on 14 or maybe 15. Always thought it would be hard for Rafa to catch Fed's slam haul. He's 26, a decline would probably be expect to kick in when he's 27/28, not 26. Fed's famous loss to Nadal @ Wimbledon was in 2008, Fed also happened to be 26 at the time. Of course that was the final however, that would be more of a crushing blow and yet he went on to win 4 more slams after and a total of 7 grand slam finals.

Oh quite, I'm not suggesting Nadal is finished or even in decline. More that this is a little preview of how he is likely to behave when actually in decline.

I'm suggesting Nadal is in decline, and to coin a phrase:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8H7XFyJYbU&t=02m18s

I see in my absence there have been another ton of defending the impossible posts....