Novak's thoughts about the Rafa defeat

First topic message reminder :

"You can't underestimate any opponent. I don't think Rafa did, he's well aware of the quality of all the players on the tour.

"But it's a Grand Slam. It's Wimbledon. Everybody wants to come up with their best game, especially when you're playing one of the top players.

"You have nothing to lose. You're out there on the court and you're going for your shots.

"It can serve as an example for everybody that anything is possible in this sport. Even though myself, Rafa, Roger, Murray, we've been dominant in Grand Slams, and it's expected of us to reach the last four.

"But tennis is improving. Everybody plays equally well."

Djokovic had a minor scare against another Czech on Friday in a third round match which was played, just like Nadal's, under the Centre Court roof.


http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-29/top-stories/32473586_1_america-s-ryan-harrison-novak-djokovic-rafael-nadal

What I found interest was the last line of the quote tennis is improving a view that I myself share. Also i am glad that Novak acknowledges the efforts and the talents of the mid ranking guys. In the era of top level dominance I think it is often lost upon the majority of fans how good the also rans are. This period is replete with tough talent and ability that is what I find most amusing about those who put forward the thesis that outside of the top 4 there isn't much quality there. For my money we have seen in recent weeks both with the struggles of the big 3 in the last two slams we have seen how the lower ranked guys are of top quality and that the competition is incredibly strong. I think many people were spoiled by Roger's easy success against his outgunned contemporaries. However i think what we are seeing today is a great deal of talent and ability top to bottom in the tour. However the top guys are just that much better and more consistent then we usually see and therefore this perception exists that since they are getting the results the second tier guys aren't doing enough. I think that is patently false.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Anything soCal can do Boggy can do better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfHBPusZg6E

I see them being as more like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNhTYJGjc2g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4WGQmWcrbs

This encapsulates the forum

lydian wrote:

bogbrush wrote: we may all be sad gits who sit on internet forums

May? Lol...

We all spend far too much time on here, indeed I bet we bore our friends at tennis clubs rigid with tennis opinions and stats about players many of them have never heard of!

That was what the "ooh err..." was for.

I think what gives a 606v2er away is the detailed famiarity with Wee Keira theories and the science of time delays between points.

One of the reasons why Rafa's defeat was such as shock is that the big four have been so immune from early exits in recent years.
Yes, this would have been a huge upset at any time. But it seemed even more earth shattering coming at a time when the big four have mainly only lost to each other in a GS event.
The very fact that this could happen, but hasn't happened like this for some time, highlights just how consistent the main guys have been in the big events.

HM Murdoch wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Anything soCal can do Boggy can do better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfHBPusZg6E

I see them being as more like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNhTYJGjc2g

I'm obviously Eddie.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:If the rest were like you Lydian I wouldn't hate on Nadal.

Makes me wish I never went on forums in the first place, corrupted my mind a bit.

CP and SA and few others from BBC606 peed me off. Nadal is a decent guy most the time I just hate the trolls

Fair enough JM, like LK says there are good/bad fans of all the top 4 players...the other thing is that "fans" can often like more than 1 player anyway. And for myself I;ve been a fan of a diverse set of players over the years...with often not much in common between them. Sometimes I like a particular shot of theirs, or their approach to the game. I dont have an identikit pattern I'm looking for. For example, I was a fan of Sampras (yeah I know...he's boring right) but I've never been struck the same by Federer. As a tennis player myself, and heavily involved with coaching, I appreciate his game immensely...but he just doesnt do it for me. So its a weird one in what makes us all affliliate to certain players. But to actually "hate" a player, or worse still a fan, seems a bit silly to me. With that in mind for me Nadal gets alot of hate he doesnt deserve. Much of it seems to stem from the threat he posed to Federer himself, and to his records. Just as many Sampras fans hated Federer for getting nearer his...and ad infinitum it goes. Then we have the early loss of Nadal here opening the doors for others...and of course Federer too if he got to the final...so I can see why people got so excited about him going out...but it went OTT for me. When Nadal was called "scum"...by a poster who has now posted a lengthy, well written thread...you wonder why the hate? Why the tribalism? I guess thats me being uptopic though, sport often divides rather than unites.

But at the end of the day none of these players impact our life. As professiionals they provide entertainment for us to watch beyond their own desire to win. They may inspire our own tennis playing, or our children's tennis playing - as they should do, but surely not much more beyond that. Speaking if inspiration, Nadal has been an amazing role model for kids. I am involved heavily around the junior scene and travel far and wide to lower tier tournaments in the UK and I can tell you Nadal has injected huge interest into the sport like no other for kids, even more so than Federer. Much more actually at 12 and under levels. And every kid plays with his racquet or similar Babolat (lord knows how much money Babolat have made from racquets off the back of Nadal from being nowhere 10 years ago). Kids tap into his fighting spirit and whip-like shots. yes as they get older they may change and appreciate other things but Nadal is getting people into the sport in the first place. And this injection of interest into the game he has brought is to his credit...and to our future enjoyment of the sport. That's all I would say about Nadal at this point...its just a counterpoint to the hate he gets.

Agree SFP...we almost assume these guys cant lose before QFs but the guy below #100 can play a little when they're "on". And yet we saw what a superhuman effort it takes to beat a Nadal or Djokovic these days. One guy down my club thought Rosol must have been on something given the trance-like look he had in his eyes...lol.

Enjoyed the Chicken fight LK

sirfredperry wrote:One of the reasons why Rafa's defeat was such as shock is that the big four have been so immune from early exits in recent years.
Yes, this would have been a huge upset at any time. But it seemed even more earth shattering coming at a time when the big four have mainly only lost to each other in a GS event.
The very fact that this could happen, but hasn't happened like this for some time, highlights just how consistent the main guys have been in the big events.

I agree to an extent, but we need to be careful not to blend the high points we remember of the 'big 4' stats to create something that's not quite there and overstate the (already huge) shock level of this exit. The real consistency of big 4 guys mostly losing only to other big 4 guys started in 2011 (2 exits to non 'big 4' players out of 12 exits overall, one of which was Nadal himself) - and this year has matched that number already (2 exits to non 'big 4' players out of 7 so far). Before that there were a fair chunk of exits to non 'big 4' players. The main story from 2011 onwards has been Djoko and Murray upping their consistency after 2010, which was a strangely patchy year for each of the 'big 4' in their separate ways.

I still think that the biggest shock exit in recent years has been Nadal at RG 2009.

Yes, RG 2009 was bigger than this. Not by miles, but it was bigger.

Do the losses matter to Nadal though? After 2009 Nadal came back with his strongest year 2010...if anything these losses may provide inspiration for Nadal to push on. Although with Rosol, I think he'll just write that one off as a fluke performance.

lydian wrote:Do the losses matter to Nadal though? After 2009 Nadal came back with his strongest year 2010...if anything these losses may provide inspiration for Nadal to push on. Although with Rosol, I think he'll just write that one off as a fluke performance.

I agree to some extent, but I also subscribe to the idea that trends emerge. Yes, there can be blips, bit if you look at Slam performances (use the Wiki layout, it's really helpful how they lay it out and represent trends) I always find it interesting how Feds performance can be seen to be gently trending downwards, starting with a few aberrations (like AO '08 semi followed by finals and wins) but against what came in '10 the '08 semi can be seen as the start of the curve dipping down.

Personally, I see W '12 the same way for Rafa; he'll make finals and win again I'm sure, but I suspect this will be seen in 2/3 years as the curve starting to dip (indeed following from '11 when it may have passed the peak).

I have to admit lydian you have been sticking the boot into Murray this week which has been refreshing. Not a full kicking, but some criticism to which normally you have been quite quiet all in fairness and good spirit I might add.

It does usually beat the more extreme praise and criticism he receives.

lydian wrote:Do the losses matter to Nadal though? After 2009 Nadal came back with his strongest year 2010...if anything these losses may provide inspiration for Nadal to push on. Although with Rosol, I think he'll just write that one off as a fluke performance.

That's a different question, and I agree that thus far in his career he has used his experiences, good and bad, to drive him on to improve. The real question for me is the point at which he will run out of gas in the tank to support his drive to improve: given his age of 26 and his mileage of 705 matches where cheaply won points have been a relative rarity I'd expect to see his peak arrive not later than the next 18 months (always assuming we have not already seen it). For example, it's difficult to imagine that he'll be better placed going into W 2013 than he was this year. The next two slams on his least favourite surface assume some importance for assessment of his overall career trajectory.

On a 'Fedal' statistical note, Rafa's got to win this USO to keep up with Fed's pace at the same age. Whilst it's fair to point out that Fed only picked up one slam in 2008, which is his 'age equivalent' to Nadal's 2013, he picked up 2 in his 'age equivalent' to Nadal's 2014.

bogbrush wrote:
David Ferrer struggles to #4 at peak and returns to #5 when old. Federer is one event from being #1 at 31 and miles below his peak form. No young stars come through. Are these hallmarks of a tougher period? Personally I think all eras are more or less the same, with technology and conditions making it tough to equate performance.

A bit weak, by your standards BB!! Ferrer is as good now as he was 4 years ago. So he's not really had a peak more of a three to four year plateau

Fed was utterly dominant as a GOAT would be - his relative lack of dominance has little to do with age, more to do with having 2 or 3 rival who beat him more than his earlier rivals did. Even him getting to No.1, merely means that the Top 2 have failed to keep up their amazing dominance of 2011.

The best example used to be Roddick. Simply because in 2009/10 he was as good, as he was a better all round player than he was in 2003. He couldn't even get in the Top 5, let alone No.1

I'm never dismissive of any era (I was a bit hacked off with the quality of the mid 90's) as I remain in awe at what these players can do - but 2002/3 was relatively poor and as you know I almost danced naked when Fed won his first Slam as it made sure the potential Hewitt/Roddick dominance was stamped upon

In 2002, Tommy Haas reached No.2. Enough said!!

We'll all argue long into the night and as a Murray fan it puts me an awkward position as it appears I'm making excuses for his lack of slam (as if ) but I just enjoy the Tennis more now than I did 10 years ago. I do hope that we don't get a Raonic serve dominated new era though

lol LK...to be honest I'm really not a fan of Murray at all. I've tried, I really have, being British and all but I just cant do it. It stems back to when he first broke onto the scene and was cramping and moaning in that Queens match. I instantly marked him as a "loser". Childish I know but for all his talent I've been used to positive energy coming from greats of the game. Since then I just havent been able to warm to his inbuilt oncourt negative demeanour and general whingeing at sore body parts, coaches and anything else around him he finds irritating. Yes I know he's meant to be a stand up comedy king off-court and his girlfriend isnt bad looking either which tends to indicate he's got some personality...but I dont see him much off court, only the rubbing of body parts or pained grimace whenever he loses a point. Besides that his tennis isnt bad...lol...albeit dont get me started on the 2nd serve and his passiveness. But for the record - I dont hate him! But I have to admit I tend to support whoever he's playing. So...tie me up and tickle me to death with a feather for admitting it.

I like those Wiki charts BB...lord knows who fills them in but I'm glad they do. Yes I think trends with Nadal do appear...often after long periods of success where I think he's mentally spent. Because his game is built on mental strength so much, if he's 10% off then I think he's more vulnerable than others at the top. For me there have been a few times he's been mentally AWOL...Hamburg 2007, USO08, RG 2009, WTF 2011, Wimb 2012...each time the opponent has played a blinder, dont get me wrong...but its coincided - or seemed to coincide, not to take away good play from the opponent - with him being mentally out of sync - which seems usually generated/initiated through being physically tired. He seems vulnerable to that...often after long clay/grass hauls. Importantly, the trend may start to show these mental dips getting closer. But as you say he'll still win titles inbetween. He's been around a long time now, we cant expect him to compete like he was at 19-22yr old, and his game isnt built on easy power shots that can carry him through matches.

Sometimes high doses of Adrenaline make you perform like you only could do in your dreams, that is the only reason for his sudden improvement this past week.

Its the same reason how Murray beat Nadal in 2008.

Do you know what lydian, I won't tickle you to death with a feather...

I will just say "How you can you support that cheating Spanish scumbag!!!!"

Bantro

I don't think tennis will get back to serve dominated styles winning. What you have is those who are strong off both the BH and FH side on the baseline like Djokovic/Nadal/Federer and then you get the big servers who are good off one side, either the BH or FH alas Raonic/Isner/Berdych and those in between like Murray/Tsonga/Ferrer.

Bring S&V back into the coaching manual. It is just as valuable as sex education in schools!

Interesting whether the 09 French Rafa exit was a bigger shock than the latest Wimbledon defeat (see earlier posts).
Still not sure whether Rafa was fully fit for the 09 RG, and he did miss Wimbledon afterwards, although it still came as a big surprise when he went out to Soderling.
But the Swede was a top player and not someone ranked 100 in the world as was Rosol. Yes, Rafa had never lost at RG before that (and hasn't since, of course). But, hey, his Wimbledon record aint bad, either - with finals at least in all the years he's played the tournament since 06.
So it could be argued that the Rosol shock was a bigger one than RG in 09, especially as it came so early in the tournament.
I tell you what would have been an even greater shock (and it nearly happened). That would have been Fed going out to Falla in the opening round at Wimbledon in 2010.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Sometimes high doses of Adrenaline make you perform like you only could do in your dreams, that is the only reason for his sudden improvement this past week.

Its the same reason how Murray beat Nadal in 2008.

You just love to disrespect certain players don't you Josiah? What about Murray's 2010 SF defeat against Rafa, a far better performance, simply because the poor Spaniard was run ragged and had to retire hurt (of course I forgot that's the reason why Murray won - it won't be that his superb play caused Rafa to overcook his body )

And please don't tell me you're patronising Murray with that lazy "sudden improvement" comment - apologies if I have this wrong, but if I am correct note that he and Fed have identical Slam records since the start of 2011

I mean what excatly had the serial QF Slam appearing Murray "improved" in considering he's only in the last 16

lol I know LK...I'm the first to say he shouldnt time waste but lets not get onto that old chestnut or we'll be here all day. To be fair I was a bigger fan of Borg, Agassi and Sampras though. In this "era" I've not been switched on by Federer, Djoko or Murray...so Nadal it is, probably also influenced by the fact I do alot of business in Spain and my parents have lived there for many years...but I'm keeping an eye on wee Goffin for the future.

Yes, I have this feeling that if they sped up the courts we wouldnt return straight back the 90s. Strings and racquets make it easier to return, and with more spin than before. It might actually make it even harder to volley because there would be even less time to react to the returning ball. Stroke technique has changed alot these past 10 years too...kids are taught to produce the whip-like effect from early on now...Sampras, Edberg, et al never had to cope with 2-3000rpm+, 90 mph+ returns...never mind the even higher/faster passing shots. BUT...as we discussed t'other day, S&V can still have a place, or more of a place than now. I still think the ideal player is a composite of Djokovic and Sampras...he'll come along one day.

Agree lydian. This is where the lack of analysis in tennis on TV really pi$$es me off. They should show a pitch map of say where a Federer or Karlovic served this Wimbledon and the serves they came in behind. I think that way it would show the exact margin for error in the accuracy of the serve required to be able to come in behind and put a volley away.

Also just by looking at the courts this year and the worn out grass on the baseline. What I will say is that it is good to see some worn out grass by the net

Indeed LK...I guess the stronger groundstrokes these days do allow for more putaways at the net...but dont forget all the doubles matches played on the courts too.

Aye. I think the key to good put aways or volleying is coming in behind the right shot. Isn't to say that all tennis players can't play the shot, just some make the decision a lot better than others. I was actually screaming in anger at Karlovic because he played so many poor volleys. At times he looked like her couldn't be arsed and over times he played some beautys. I think if he upped his net % success he would've won.

HM Murdoch wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I have a degree in history and have forgotten more about history then you will ever know.

bogbrush wrote:I don't need anyone to tell me my business acumen - >£8m profit a year from my own business tells me I know my stuff.

Well, I'm really handsome. Seriously, you should see me. I'm like a male version of Helen of Troy.

I know, bad isn't it? My only mitigation is reaction to being told my employees kiss my arse (I wish!).

Funny thing is none of this stuff is verifiable; we may all be sad gits who sit on internet forums for an unhealthy amount of time. ooh er......

I should also say that my comment was written with a smile. Seeing you and SoCal wind each other up is becoming a form of entertainment in its own right! I actually think that if events could contrive for you to become flatmates, we would have the makings of a good sitcom! (probably one with lots of 'Bottom'-style slapstick violence!).

For the love of god I would rather go back to living under Ahmadinejad as unappetizing as that sounds. I am out of the wind up game Murdoch, I appreciate your post as I like good humor and ironey like the next man and your post was a bit of both. I really can't be bothered to have discussions with people that annoy me and I don't enjoy talking to. I had a relapse but I learned my lesson. So you may need to find another pastime I don't know if there will be many more wind up sessions between me and you know who to enjoy as a spectator.

Socal & BB in a twist is very amusing!

You do seem to allow BB to wind you up a little too easily socal but maybe it's an involuntary reaction! I been told by my own family I really do know how to push their buttons when I want to, but I tend to refrain more these days (old age @ 28.... ), BB on the other hand: your pithy comments do push socal's buttons rather quickly, the to and fro is great!

Like I said would refer you to the top post, had a relapse but no more wind up sessions.

I'm not up to anything luciusmann, I just can't stand the denigration of other players for the purpose of promoting Djokovic. It's like everyone in history has to be tweaked and reclassified so that we can arrive at a twisted rating of Djokovic.

It's not necessary; Djokovic is a top, top player and by the time he hangs his racquet up he'll not need any diminution of past greats to boost him up.

socal1976 wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I have a degree in history and have forgotten more about history then you will ever know.

bogbrush wrote:I don't need anyone to tell me my business acumen - >£8m profit a year from my own business tells me I know my stuff.

Well, I'm really handsome. Seriously, you should see me. I'm like a male version of Helen of Troy.

I know, bad isn't it? My only mitigation is reaction to being told my employees kiss my arse (I wish!).

Funny thing is none of this stuff is verifiable; we may all be sad gits who sit on internet forums for an unhealthy amount of time. ooh er......

I should also say that my comment was written with a smile. Seeing you and SoCal wind each other up is becoming a form of entertainment in its own right! I actually think that if events could contrive for you to become flatmates, we would have the makings of a good sitcom! (probably one with lots of 'Bottom'-style slapstick violence!).

For the love of god I would rather go back to living under Ahmadinejad as unappetizing as that sounds. I am out of the wind up game Murdoch, I appreciate your post as I like good humor and ironey like the next man and your post was a bit of both. I really can't be bothered to have discussions with people that annoy me and I don't enjoy talking to. I had a relapse but I learned my lesson. So you may need to find another pastime I don't know if there will be many more wind up sessions between me and you know who to enjoy as a spectator.

Socal, I don't actually think that either you or BB are out to wind people up. You just seems to have very different views on tennis and, indeed, the world in general. Sometimes this causes fireworks and it's fun to sit back and watch!

bogbrush wrote:I'm not up to anything luciusmann, I just can't stand the denigration of other players for the purpose of promoting Djokovic. It's like everyone in history has to be tweaked and reclassified so that we can arrive at a twisted rating of Djokovic.

It's not necessary; Djokovic is a top, top player and by the time he hangs his racquet up he'll not need any diminution of past greats to boost him up.

I hear what you're saying. It's tedious hearing it too often. It's as if socal works for Djoko's PR team! I find some of his points too amusing to respond to though, especially the one about Fed padding his numbers in the 'wee keira'. Too amusing to be taken seriously!

luciusmann wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I'm not up to anything luciusmann, I just can't stand the denigration of other players for the purpose of promoting Djokovic. It's like everyone in history has to be tweaked and reclassified so that we can arrive at a twisted rating of Djokovic.

It's not necessary; Djokovic is a top, top player and by the time he hangs his racquet up he'll not need any diminution of past greats to boost him up.

I hear what you're saying. It's tedious hearing it too often. It's as if socal works for Djoko's PR team! I find some of his points too amusing to respond to though, especially the one about Fed padding his numbers in the 'wee keira'. Too amusing to be taken seriously!

That is pretty funny the demented individual who spent a decade on old 606 and on this 606 diminishing and disrespecting Nadal as a moonballer, and as only winning as a result of slow conditions, as a borderline cheat is now ACCUSING ME OF DIMINISHING OTHER PLAYERS. I will say this for BB he must have a pair of watermelons down there in terms of a combination of gall, nerve, and delusion he is a special case. I love being lectured by the individual who has made these comments disrespecting Nadal and the following towards Djokovic lecturing me on not being mean to Andy roddick and Lleyton Hewitt.

Lets see some of the greatest hits of the person who now dresses himself up as a crusader defending the accomplishments of great players
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-Djokovic has no weapons
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate
-Djokovic won the AO 2008 because fed got mono
-Djokovic is another lleyton hewitt

That is just a portion of the self appointed caped crusader for not denigrating player's accomplishments greatest hits.

The problem with a large segment of fed fans is that they throw it and dish it on all other of Roger's main rivals, but if you give them 5 percent of it back they flip. Fed fans (some of them) constantly rant about how Novak and Nadal only win because of slow conditions, many do, trying to attach giant asteriks to these two players in this and many other ways. But if you suggest and bring evidence that Roger's early contemporaries were not the strongest field then all of sudden you are taking credit away from players. Frankly you couldn't make up this level of hypocrisy and logical disconnect.

In fairness though BB has mellowed from his 'wild' days.

The forum has a harmony about it now.

Let's not spoil that eh.

legendkillarV2 wrote:In fairness though BB has mellowed from his 'wild' days.

The forum has a harmony about it now.

Let's not spoil that eh.

Sorry LK i am not going to be lectured by this obvious neurotic who doesn't remember the crap he has forced us to read over the last ten years where he timed Nadal scratching himself between points and now he wants to pretend that he is the protector of respecting great players accomplishments. And then the crap about the AO win in 2008 and the drama queen stuff directed and Djoko and he expects any sane person to forget his lengthy and dark history of attempting to put giant asteriks on the accomplishments of Nadal and Djoko. Please LK, my mother didn't raise any fools I am not about to let the lady of loose morals of babylon question my promiscuity.

socal1976 wrote:

Sorry LK i am not going to be lectured by this obvious neurotic who doesn't remember the crap he has forced us to read over the last ten years where he timed Nadal scratching himself between points and now he wants to pretend that he is the protector of respecting great players accomplishments. And then the crap about the AO win in 2008 and the drama queen stuff directed and Djoko and he expects any sane person to forget his lengthy and dark history of attempting to put giant asteriks on the accomplishments of Nadal and Djoko. Please LK, my mother didn't raise any fools I am not about to let the lady of loose morals of babylon question my promiscuity.

Dude, he literally FORCED you to read his posts?! fiend!!!!!

I understand the frustration, but he has mellowed. It's not in your nature to dig out the past and do a full character assassination. He has since taken a balanced view on things and has left Nadal and Djokovic alone.

did you know the swear filter turns the word b_ummer into 'fweind'?! 'fweind' isn't even a word FFS!!

socal1976 wrote:
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate

All of those are pretty much spot on.

Seifer Almasy wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate

All of those are pretty much spot on.

on court coaching
questionable cyclical fitness

Thank God socal isn't losing it.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I understand the frustration, but he has mellowed. It's not in your nature to dig out the past and do a full character assassination. He has since taken a balanced view on things and has left Nadal and Djokovic alone.

What character assassination which one of my comments are not true, either retract that wording or tell me which one of my statements are false? Especially in light of BB putting himself on a pedestal as the defender of truth justice and respecting player's accomplishments. Do you seriously expect me to not respond to that level of hypocrisy with just a taste, a taste of his own track record? Where does that very loaded term character assassination come out, why is it his credible is sacrosanct? I just don't think the term is fair in the least LK, I thought you would be more fair.

reckoner wrote:

Seifer Almasy wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate

All of those are pretty much spot on.

on court coaching
questionable cyclical fitness

How about the comments towards Djoko you feel all those are fair as well?

Oh, I spoke too soon!

socal1976 wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I understand the frustration, but he has mellowed. It's not in your nature to dig out the past and do a full character assassination. He has since taken a balanced view on things and has left Nadal and Djokovic alone.

What character assassination which one of my comments are not true, either retract that wording or tell me which one of my statements are false? Especially in light of BB putting himself on a pedestal as the defender of truth justice and respecting player's accomplishments. Do you seriously expect me to not respond to that level of hypocrisy with just a taste, a taste of his own track record? Where does that very loaded term character assassination come out, why is it his credible is sacrosanct?

I know sometimes it is good to give medicine back, but don't raise to the bait

The results in Slams will speak for themselves

reckoner wrote:

Seifer Almasy wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate

All of those are pretty much spot on.

on court coaching
questionable cyclical fitness

Ah yes, and charging players 'cause he was losing. Fist pumping and shouting every point like some rabid doggy. I saw Djokovic clapping a Troicki shot today, all I see from Nadal is evil stares and gamesmanship. I can like Djok. He has some humility and CLASS.

socal seriously dude that's ALL you do. it's not a question of responding with a taste of someone's hypocrisy (whatever that even means). you spend your entire time seeking confrontation with an "extremist" army of fanatic Federer fans.

To be perfectly frank there aren't that many Federer fans on this board, certainly not enough for an army! It comes off as a little weird, I'm just saying. I read your posts when I first joined here and thought you were coming up with phrases reminiscent of the Dubya administration when they declaring war on terror...

reckoner please don't get on socal's case. He isn't that extreme. Cut him some slack!

socal1976 wrote:

luciusmann wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I'm not up to anything luciusmann, I just can't stand the denigration of other players for the purpose of promoting Djokovic. It's like everyone in history has to be tweaked and reclassified so that we can arrive at a twisted rating of Djokovic.

It's not necessary; Djokovic is a top, top player and by the time he hangs his racquet up he'll not need any diminution of past greats to boost him up.

I hear what you're saying. It's tedious hearing it too often. It's as if socal works for Djoko's PR team! I find some of his points too amusing to respond to though, especially the one about Fed padding his numbers in the 'wee keira'. Too amusing to be taken seriously!

That is pretty funny the demented individual who spent a decade on old 606 and on this 606 diminishing and disrespecting Nadal as a moonballer, and as only winning as a result of slow conditions, as a borderline cheat is now ACCUSING ME OF DIMINISHING OTHER PLAYERS. I will say this for BB he must have a pair of watermelons down there in terms of a combination of gall, nerve, and delusion he is a special case. I love being lectured by the individual who has made these comments disrespecting Nadal and the following towards Djokovic lecturing me on not being mean to Andy roddick and Lleyton Hewitt.

Lets see some of the greatest hits of the person who now dresses himself up as a crusader defending the accomplishments of great players
-Nadal is a moonballer
-he uses mtos as gamesmanship
-he violates the time rule tactically
-he only wins because of slowed conditions
-Djokovic has no weapons
-he waited around till Federer got old before he started to dominate
-Djokovic won the AO 2008 because fed got mono
-Djokovic is another lleyton hewitt

That is just a portion of the self appointed caped crusader for not denigrating player's accomplishments greatest hits.

The problem with a large segment of fed fans is that they throw it and dish it on all other of Roger's main rivals, but if you give them 5 percent of it back they flip. Fed fans (some of them) constantly rant about how Novak and Nadal only win because of slow conditions, many do, trying to attach giant asteriks to these two players in this and many other ways. But if you suggest and bring evidence that Roger's early contemporaries were not the strongest field then all of sudden you are taking credit away from players. Frankly you couldn't make up this level of hypocrisy and logical disconnect.

Is there something you'd like to get off your chest?

This isn't feeling like a BROMANCE guys...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO5fPnrHVzE

What a TIME WASTER haha

reckoner wrote:socal seriously dude that's ALL you do. it's not a question of responding with a taste of someone's hypocrisy (whatever that even means). you spend your entire time seeking confrontation with an "extremist" army of fanatic Federer fans.

To be perfectly frank there aren't that many Federer fans on this board, certainly not enough for an army! It comes off as a little weird, I'm just saying. I read your posts when I first joined here and thought you were coming up with phrases reminiscent of the Dubya administration when they declaring war on terror...

I know I purposely recycled some of the terms when I wanted to be satirical and for comedic effect. I actually don't have much of a problem with fed fan's at this point I would say my biggest issue is with about 2 active posters, which I should be smart enough to just ignore. Now that I said my piece in calling out that ridiculous hypocrisy I am happy just ignoring them. If you don't like what I write reckoner please feel free to not read them and comment if they irritate you. I mean there are no shortage of people who read my stuff, like it and enjoy commenting on it or enjoy telling me I am wrong.

Geez socal....see what you've done? You've unleashed The Seifer now...

Count me in. I really enjoyed the one where Djokovic is single-handedly bringing back serve & volley tennis.