French Open 2013 Finals Thread - David vs Goliath ,Rafa to roll for 8th Crown in history?

[invisiblecoolers]

First topic message reminder :

Massive favorite vs major underdog could be the theme of the finals, can David beat the Goliath for a career rewarding title?

I guess I owe a good thread in this FO series and here I go, the match starts roughly at 3.00 PM, nice start time for Canadian fans, as it will be 9 AM in the morning.

Let Analyze do David have it in him to win Rafa aka slay Goliath? the straight forward answer would be no, some of them has gone so far saying I won't mind betting my house on Rafa win even if David is 2 sets up, such is the impact of Rafa. What I find strange is punters fear, they are giving only 4 odds on David to win the first set, are they seeing the match to be closer than what a general tennis fan would see? Indeed Djoko got 2.9 odds on him, so chance of upset tomorrow is only marginal compared to Rafa's semifinal opponent?

Rafa to win 3-0 gets 1.72 odds and 3-1 gets 3.50.

Whoever gonna win it was an eventual tiresome tournament with so many upsets, with Robredo being the chief culprit, it was a fun enjoyable tournament and I hope we get a fitting finale with the biggest upset.

Let the game Begin.

[lydian]

Yes, but tough luck for potentially who he plays too.

[kingraf]

seventeen is a big goal. I will be happy if he passes 14, to be honest. A third Wimbledon title to give him a triple crown (thus establishing his place as one of the greatest Grass court champions), as well as "dual citizenship (being expertly adept at two surfaces, i.e minimum of three Slams on two surfaces) and I think Nadal's spot in the pantheon is secured... with some serious armour.

Will be interesting to see Nadal's Wimbledon draw, while I think Djoko will fancy his chances vs Nadal on grass, I dont think he wants Nadal in the Quarters, nor would any other big four player. But grass brings in guys like Tsonga, Berdych, Haas, so I fully expect an "upset" fairly early for someone.

[break_in_the_fifth]

True silver, we probably take it for granted what Nadal is doing but on the most gruelling of surfaces to have won titles from 2005 to 2013 is staggering. Most guys are happy to get to a final like Ferrer. The enormity of what guys like Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are achieving will likely only sink in once they're all retired.

And Murray.

[break_in_the_fifth]

Nadal is at a higher level relatively than Fed was at his age and with no new competitors over the horizon, he could probably go further. For all people go on about Feds longetivity, Nadal's may be more impressive.

[summerblues]

A little closer look at Rafa vs Roger in the slam count:

Rafa started out younger so for the longest time he was ahead of Roger when counting slams relative to their age. But then he did not quite match the pace that Roger set in his mid twenties so Roger overtook him. But Rafa has a chance to catch up again:

Rafa is now 27 (Roger was 26 and one month when he won his 12th at USO 2007). Roger's 13th came at USO 2008 when he was 27 and one month old. If Rafa wins Wimbledon this year, they will be even - he will also be 27 and one month.

Also, Roger significantly slowed down after 28, so if Rafa can keep up his pace for a few more years, he can still do it. On the other hand, the fact that Roger slowed down may indicate that Rafa is also reaching the age when it will be harder to keep it going. In any event, the next couple of years could be quite interesting from this perspective.

[invisiblecoolers]

seventeen is a big goal. I will be happy if he passes 14, to be honest. A third Wimbledon title to give him a triple crown (thus establishing his place as one of the greatest Grass court champions), as well as "dual citizenship (being expertly adept at two surfaces, i.e minimum of three Slams on two surfaces) and I think Nadal's spot in the pantheon is secured... with some serious armour.

Will be interesting to see Nadal's Wimbledon draw, while I think Djoko will fancy his chances vs Nadal on grass, I dont think he wants Nadal in the Quarters, nor would any other big four player. But grass brings in guys like Tsonga, Berdych, Haas, so I fully expect an "upset" fairly early for someone.

The most likely candidate is Federer , this year he have to write it off and get back to drawing board and practice harder to get back into match fitness and have one big go in 2014.

[summerblues]

Yes, but tough luck for potentially who he plays too.

I did not mean tough luck for Rafa, just all around tough luck - mostly for the organizers.

[break_in_the_fifth]

The scoreline was so one sided!? Also just read that there was an on court intruder. That must have been the most interesting part of the match

[bogbrush]

If the surfaces are so homogenised, then why is Nadal favourite against Djokovic on clay, but Djokovic favourite against Nadal on hard courts?

I don't think he is.

I put Djokovic as favourite wherever they meet, and if he hadn't done a very silly thing at the net on Friday he'd have proved it at arG.

[User 774433]

If the surfaces are so homogenised, then why is Nadal favourite against Djokovic on clay, but Djokovic favourite against Nadal on hard courts?

I don't think he is.

I put Djokovic as favourite wherever they meet, and if he hadn't done a very silly thing at the net on Friday he'd have proved it at arG.

If Nadal had made that relatively simply forehand ar 30-16 6-5 in the 4th set he could (and should) have won it in 4 sets.
Statistically Nadal did hit more winners (nearly double in the last set), and more points overall- so I don't really think we can give any 'victory' to Djokovic just yet.
Let's see anyway- the last time Djoko and Nadal played on HC Djokovic won in 5 sets as well.

[summerblues]

seventeen is a big goal.

Yes it is, but quite frankly it almost has to be his goal. You cannot do it just for the money and even if you are having fun it is better if you set some targets for yourself. Also, Rafa - even more so than say Roger - strikes me as someone who - relatively speaking - cares more about winning than about playing. So he will need some goals.

And this one is as good as any. It is important, it is difficult, but not totally out of reach.

Also, it is hard to see what other meaningful goals he can set for himself. He already has the most at RG (he may try to get 10, but that is just a number), he is unlikely to have a chance to do the same at any of the other slams; and he is also unlikely to ever reach the most weeks at number one. Hard to think of that many other things he can really aim for.

[User 774433]

Hard to think of that many other things he can really aim for.

He could try and practice the 'I am not faborite' line before a Ferrer match more often- frankly it wasn't very convincing this time.

[socal1976]

I have no doubt that Nadal would have more slams than Federer already if not for his serious and chronic leg problems. I don't see Federer being number one or winning wimbeldon with Nadal in the field. I mean Nadal has always had the beating of Federer and in the early days these two were the main two guys who were contesting every major prize. I personally don't think Nadal will top Federer. I think Djokovic will make sure of that and Murray to a lesser extent. Not to mention we don't know when that last injury will happen that he just can't comeback and dominate after will happen. Although it is quite clear that this last injury wasn't that hampering of his level of play.

[JuliusHMarx]

Speeds are homogenised but clay still stands alone as different. Otherwise Murray would be doing great on clay. Lets not forget all top 4-5 players are beneficiaries of homogenisation.

And all victims, potentially, in not being given the opportunity to show their full range and adaptability of skills.

[CAS]

I dont think he would have caught Federer by now even if he had not been injured, I do think he needs to spread the slam load a touch to surpass Federer IMO. if he has 18 slams but has like 10/11 French Opens I'm not sure it works to be the best player ever, that being said he 1 or 2 more Wimbledons and 1 or 2 hard court slams it would be hard to argue it.

The incredible thing is though, it wouldn't shock me if he didn't win another slam in his whole career! Murray and Djok will be dangerous to him at Wimbledon and I really can't see him beating Djokovic on a hard court. Next years ROland Garros he will be yet another year older at 28, how long can he keep doing it?

[summerblues]

If the surfaces are so homogenised, then why is Nadal favourite against Djokovic on clay, but Djokovic favourite against Nadal on hard courts?

Because if they were not homogenized, then Sampras would be the favorite against Agassi on hard, but Bruguera would be the favorite against Berasategui on clay

[User 774433]

I dont think he would have caught Federer by now even if he had not been injured, I do think he needs to spread the slam load a touch to surpass Federer IMO. if he has 18 slams but has like 10/11 French Opens I'm not sure it works to be the best player ever, that being said he 1 or 2 more Wimbledons and 1 or 2 hard court slams it would be hard to argue it.

The incredible thing is though, it wouldn't shock me if he didn't win another slam in his whole career! Murray and Djok will be dangerous to him at Wimbledon and I really can't see him beating Djokovic on a hard court. Next years ROland Garros he will be yet another year older at 28, how long can he keep doing it?

Yes, we'll have to see how he gets on.
Can he remain healthy?

[User 774433]

If the surfaces are so homogenised, then why is Nadal favourite against Djokovic on clay, but Djokovic favourite against Nadal on hard courts?

Because if they were not homogenized, then Sampras would be the favorite against Agassi on hard, but Bruguera would be the favorite against Berasategui on clay

Yeah, fair point

[JuliusHMarx]

I have no doubt that Nadal would have more slams than Federer already if not for his serious and chronic leg problems. I don't see Federer being number one or winning wimbeldon with Nadal in the field. I mean Nadal has always had the beating of Federer and in the early days these two were the main two guys who were contesting every major prize. I personally don't think Nadal will top Federer. I think Djokovic will make sure of that and Murray to a lesser extent. Not to mention we don't know when that last injury will happen that he just can't comeback and dominate after will happen. Although it is quite clear that this last injury wasn't that hampering of his level of play.

Perhaps if not for Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems he and Fed would both be on 17 and Djoko would be on 1. Or has only Fed benefitted from Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems in the last 4 years?

[ChequeredJersey]

What a rubbish slam.

Clay is really the worst surface for tennis entertainment.

I, and millions like me, think the opposite. You cannot have the remotest understanding of the game if you can come out with a statement like that. We've had the match of the decade on Friday, which contained all the excitement and artistry you can only get on clay. Contrast the feast of tennis we've witnessed for the last 15 days with the dispiriting rubbish which will be served up next week at Queens.

No doubt you'll be watching that and imagining you're being "entertained".

If you think that Queen's, one of the most prestigious grass court tournaments for many, many years, will serve up "dispiriting rubbish" then I can only say that you cannot have the remotest understanding of the game

It kind of did last year, tbh. And I say that as an employee there, a lot of attendees and members wanted their money back (helped in no way by the farcical final). But when I last went as a viewer, for the rain-delayed Tsonga-Murray match, the tennis was glorious

[djlovesyou]

Is this perhaps the least cared about men's grand slam final in history?

[User 774433]

Is this perhaps the least cared about men's grand slam final in history?

The semi was an epic.

[djlovesyou]

The semi was very long. I guess that's the definition of epic.

[ChequeredJersey]

The semi was very long. I guess that's the definition of epic.

From what I've heard and the little I saw, it started mediocrely, was long and ended epically and in the highest of qualities. Like Part II of Handel's Messiah

[socal1976]

I have no doubt that Nadal would have more slams than Federer already if not for his serious and chronic leg problems. I don't see Federer being number one or winning wimbeldon with Nadal in the field. I mean Nadal has always had the beating of Federer and in the early days these two were the main two guys who were contesting every major prize. I personally don't think Nadal will top Federer. I think Djokovic will make sure of that and Murray to a lesser extent. Not to mention we don't know when that last injury will happen that he just can't comeback and dominate after will happen. Although it is quite clear that this last injury wasn't that hampering of his level of play.

Perhaps if not for Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems he and Fed would both be on 17 and Djoko would be on 1. Or has only Fed benefitted from Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems in the last 4 years?

Mainly Fed, since Djokovic in 2011 overtook Nadal. Maybe Novak would lose a little Roger a whole lot more, especially in light of how much more lopsided the Rafa v. Fed rivalry is compared to the rivalry with Djokovic.

[User 774433]

The semi was very long. I guess that's the definition of epic.

No the quality was actually very high- especially in the fifth set.

[socal1976]

It went 9-7 in the 5th on a clay court, with two notoriously slow players. In actuality with how fast these guys are in retrieving, and how slow they are in between points I am stunned it was only 4 hours and 30 minutes long. Both players were more aggressive than in past match ups and despite the surface were not willing to win on their legs alone.

[ChequeredJersey]

Nadal hit 61 winners in the semi-final, Djoko 54. It wasn't defensive tennis by any standard

[slashermcguirk]

Congrats to rafa and all his fans, amazing achievement that may never be matched. Hopefully Novak to bounce back for Wimbledon or at least take the us open

[ChequeredJersey]

Congrats to rafa and all his fans, amazing achievement that may never be matched. Hopefully Novak to bounce back for Wimbledon or at least take the us open

Though in women's tennis (and in an age where it was less of a joke) Martina Navratilova has already done this and more

[kingraf]

The final set was 82 minutes, for sixteen games. Thats around four minutes per game, I think thats a pretty decent time. Had Nadal served it out in four, at 6-5, the match would have lasted about just over Three hours

[JuliusHMarx]

I have no doubt that Nadal would have more slams than Federer already if not for his serious and chronic leg problems. I don't see Federer being number one or winning wimbeldon with Nadal in the field. I mean Nadal has always had the beating of Federer and in the early days these two were the main two guys who were contesting every major prize. I personally don't think Nadal will top Federer. I think Djokovic will make sure of that and Murray to a lesser extent. Not to mention we don't know when that last injury will happen that he just can't comeback and dominate after will happen. Although it is quite clear that this last injury wasn't that hampering of his level of play.

Perhaps if not for Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems he and Fed would both be on 17 and Djoko would be on 1. Or has only Fed benefitted from Rafa's serious and chronic leg problems in the last 4 years?

Mainly Fed, since Djokovic in 2011 overtook Nadal. Maybe Novak would lose a little Roger a whole lot more, especially in light of how much more lopsided the Rafa v. Fed rivalry is compared to the rivalry with Djokovic.

In which case, if Djoko had diagnosed his own health injuries 2 or 3 years sooner, Rafa would have less than 12 slams now, given how lopsided the Djoko v. Rafa rivalry has been recently. Then it could have been Fed 17, Rafa 9, Djoko 9.
And if Borg has played the AO, he would have had at least 13, unless Connors has played as well, in which case Borg would have had 12, and Connors 10, unless Connors has aso played the FO, then it would be 11-11.
I like this game.

[michael_o]

What a rubbish slam.

Clay is really the worst surface for tennis entertainment.

I, and millions like me, think the opposite. You cannot have the remotest understanding of the game if you can come out with a statement like that. We've had the match of the decade on Friday, which contained all the excitement and artistry you can only get on clay. Contrast the feast of tennis we've witnessed for the last 15 days with the dispiriting rubbish which will be served up next week at Queens.

No doubt you'll be watching that and imagining you're being "entertained".

If you think that Queen's, one of the most prestigious grass court tournaments for many, many years, will serve up "dispiriting rubbish" then I can only say that you cannot have the remotest understanding of the game

Prestigious?? A 500 practice tournament? Don't make me laugh. Queens is an anachronism, a ridiculously fast-court leftover from a previous era which is best forgotten. Biff, bang, wallop if you're lucky; very often just biff. Well there are plenty of people apparently who are prepared to spend £100 to watch that sort of rubbish (and I think the word is justified), but it's not for me. At least the Halle court will provide the opportunity to see some rallies, i.e. proper tennis, and that's what I shall be watching.

[User 774433]

Congrats to rafa and all his fans, amazing achievement that may never be matched. Hopefully Novak to bounce back for Wimbledon or at least take the us open

Thanks Slasher

Good luck to Djoko, but I'm sure he'll be fine and bounce back strongly.

[lydian]

Queens was admittedly boring when Roddick was ace'ing his way to the title every year for a while.

[Guest]

Bit surprised with the negativity.

Is it Nadal's fault that Ferrer has a powderpuff BH? I think today's final served as reminder just how far afield the top 4 are. This wasn't Nadal grinding Ferrer down. Ferrer had spent 6 fewer hours on court than Nadal. Nadal simply had too many weapons for Ferrer. When you have someone like Nadal who widens the court to the point where Ferrer just hasn't the range to hang in on rallies like say Murray or Djokovic do.

It was good to see Ferrer make a final as it is a testament to perseverance. This was a massacre. Nadal's FH is just ridiculous. Ferrer couldn't win a majority of shorter points.

Bring on the grass.

[The Special Juan]

I've read Nadal's going to be a top 4 seed for Wimbledon as their seedings are based on grass court form. Is this true?

[lags72]

Indeed JHM - the game of "if/would have/could have/might have" does provide hours of endless entertainment, and because it's all based on imagination, fantasy and retrospective speculation you can't even be proven wrong. As distinct from the indisputable evidence of the record books.

By the way, you do realise of course that IF he hadn't retired as early as 26, Bjorn would DEFINITELY have ended with ten RG titles and a minimum of seven Wimbledons .......

[kingraf]

Retiring and being limited by injuries ist nearly the same thing, though I get the sentiment, and its one I agree with.

[JuliusHMarx]

Indeed JHM - the game of "if/would have/could have/might have" does provide hours of endless entertainment, and because it's all based on imagination, fantasy and retrospective speculation you can't even be proven wrong. As distinct from the indisputable evidence of the record books.

By the way, you do realise of course that IF he hadn't retired as early as 26, Bjorn would DEFINITELY have ended with ten RG titles and a minimum of seven Wimbledons .......

Actually lags, I have no doubt that Connors, who by sheer coincidence is my favourite player but that has nothing to do with it, would have beaten Borg in the next 2 FOs, Wimbys and USOs, had Borg continued playing.

[michael_o]

What a rubbish slam.

Clay is really the worst surface for tennis entertainment.

I, and millions like me, think the opposite. You cannot have the remotest understanding of the game if you can come out with a statement like that. We've had the match of the decade on Friday, which contained all the excitement and artistry you can only get on clay. Contrast the feast of tennis we've witnessed for the last 15 days with the dispiriting rubbish which will be served up next week at Queens.

No doubt you'll be watching that and imagining you're being "entertained".

If you think that Queen's, one of the most prestigious grass court tournaments for many, many years, will serve up "dispiriting rubbish" then I can only say that you cannot have the remotest understanding of the game

Prestigious?? A 500 practice tournament? Don't make me laugh. Queens is an anachronism, a ridiculously fast-court leftover from a previous era which is best forgotten. Biff, bang, wallop if you're lucky; very often just biff. Well there are plenty of people apparently who are prepared to spend £100 to watch that sort of rubbish (and I think the word is justified), but it's not for me. At least the Halle court will provide the opportunity to see some rallies, i.e. proper tennis, and that's what I shall be watching.

Sorry, got that wrong. It's so "prestigious" it's a 250 event, not a 500.

[User 774433]

Bit surprised with the negativity.

Is it Nadal's fault that Ferrer has a powderpuff BH? I think today's final served as reminder just how far afield the top 4 are. This wasn't Nadal grinding Ferrer down. Ferrer had spent 6 fewer hours on court than Nadal. Nadal simply had too many weapons for Ferrer. When you have someone like Nadal who widens the court to the point where Ferrer just hasn't the range to hang in on rallies like say Murray or Djokovic do.

It was good to see Ferrer make a final as it is a testament to perseverance. This was a massacre. Nadal's FH is just ridiculous. Ferrer couldn't win a majority of shorter points.

Bring on the grass.

[lags72]

That's the spirit JHM.

And notwithstanding your honourable 'declaration of interest' wrt Jimbo, I will take your analysis as entirely unbiased in its conclusion .......

[JuliusHMarx]

What a rubbish slam.

Clay is really the worst surface for tennis entertainment.

I, and millions like me, think the opposite. You cannot have the remotest understanding of the game if you can come out with a statement like that. We've had the match of the decade on Friday, which contained all the excitement and artistry you can only get on clay. Contrast the feast of tennis we've witnessed for the last 15 days with the dispiriting rubbish which will be served up next week at Queens.

No doubt you'll be watching that and imagining you're being "entertained".

If you think that Queen's, one of the most prestigious grass court tournaments for many, many years, will serve up "dispiriting rubbish" then I can only say that you cannot have the remotest understanding of the game

Prestigious?? A 500 practice tournament? Don't make me laugh. Queens is an anachronism, a ridiculously fast-court leftover from a previous era which is best forgotten. Biff, bang, wallop if you're lucky; very often just biff. Well there are plenty of people apparently who are prepared to spend £100 to watch that sort of rubbish (and I think the word is justified), but it's not for me. At least the Halle court will provide the opportunity to see some rallies, i.e. proper tennis, and that's what I shall be watching.

Perhaps then, it's not rubbish, it's just not for you? Have you considered that?

[User 774433]

Julius- you didn't say the same to Eman when he was talking about the French Open.
Be fair

Michael- you should watch re-run of Queen's 2008, really enjoyable matches.

[michael_o]

What a rubbish slam.

Clay is really the worst surface for tennis entertainment.

I, and millions like me, think the opposite. You cannot have the remotest understanding of the game if you can come out with a statement like that. We've had the match of the decade on Friday, which contained all the excitement and artistry you can only get on clay. Contrast the feast of tennis we've witnessed for the last 15 days with the dispiriting rubbish which will be served up next week at Queens.

No doubt you'll be watching that and imagining you're being "entertained".

If you think that Queen's, one of the most prestigious grass court tournaments for many, many years, will serve up "dispiriting rubbish" then I can only say that you cannot have the remotest understanding of the game

Prestigious?? A 500 practice tournament? Don't make me laugh. Queens is an anachronism, a ridiculously fast-court leftover from a previous era which is best forgotten. Biff, bang, wallop if you're lucky; very often just biff. Well there are plenty of people apparently who are prepared to spend £100 to watch that sort of rubbish (and I think the word is justified), but it's not for me. At least the Halle court will provide the opportunity to see some rallies, i.e. proper tennis, and that's what I shall be watching.

Perhaps then, it's not rubbish, it's just not for you? Have you considered that?

Yes.

[JuliusHMarx]

Julius- you didn't say the same to Eman when he was talking about the French Open.
Be fair

Michael- you should watch re-run of Queen's 2008, really enjoyable matches.

Uh-oh Red's just warned me again. He'll be banning me next.

[User 774433]

Julius- you didn't say the same to Eman when he was talking about the French Open.
Be fair

Michael- you should watch re-run of Queen's 2008, really enjoyable matches.

Uh-oh Red's just warned me again. He'll be banning me next.

Be careful Groucho,, Emancipator might ban you first.

[lags72]

Red - and once you HAVE banned JHM, time for yet another change of username to cover your tracks ....

[User 774433]

Don't worry, I already have that sorted.

#rafitoisking

[Sponsored content]