Roger Federer vs Rafael Nadal - take XXXI

Just seems odd that this match up doesnt have its own thread. I know it isnt quite bringing the box to the office anymore, but surely it still deserves its own thread. Interesting match for Federer, a win here, and.you have to assume he is right back amongst the pigeons. A defeat, and Nadal looks heavy favourite for a fifth(!) MS1000 for 2013, in six starts.

I can actually see Federer winning tonight, but Its a mighty tough ask for the Great One.

Hope that fence you're sitting on isn't too uncomfortable kingraf ........   

A couple of hours ago you said "I think Nadal is going to defeat him" but now you post that you see a Federer win.

Has Fed's poor form improved since 8pm ....... ??

lags72 wrote:

Has Fed's poor form improved since 8pm ....... ??

 

Actually Lags, when a great player is down in confidence he needs a legendary win to get back his mojo, Roger Federer needs this match and rightly it happened, Fed will give his best and try without counting a win and thats why this match will be dangerous, Fed is the wounded Tiger and Rafa is a fire breathing dragon at the moment, dragons generally beat Tigers but wounded Tigers are always deadly.  

I think Rafa's got Roger covered on any surface, whether it's fast or slow.

Nadal's previously beaten Federer at Miami, so he can certainly better Federer at Cincinnati.

Nadal's playing out of this world at present, whereas Federer's been struggling to beat nobodies.

Lags - I had a conference call with Federer at 11PM, and he described whats going to happen in such vivid detail, that I became a believer. It went something like...

"No, maybe I can't win, you know? Maybe the only thing I can
do is just take everything he's got. But to beat me, you know
he's going to have to, you know, kill me. And to kill me, he's
gonna have to have the heart to stand in front of
me. And to do that, he's got to be willing to die
himself. I don't know if he's ready to do that. I
don't know, you know?"

I admit, I dont know if he was asking me, or telling me in that last sentence, but I am a believer.

That's impressive you got to speak directly with his Lordship the Great Swiss One, kingraf because I was given to understand that callers are usually vetted by a battery of assistants.

And it's good that you are now "a believer"

I'm not at all clear just what it is that you actually believe in - but whatever it is, I'm sure you're right ..... !!

Yeah Lags it took some begging, some claims about being somehow related to Mandela (in that "we are all one" manner), and a few promises I hope to never have to keep.

Not quite sure I know what Im a believer in, but after such a speech, its tough not to become emotionally stirred, you know?

I know it's still early evening in Cincy but personally I think someone of Federer's advanced years should be tucked up by now (after he's read the twins their bedtime stories of course ......)

Its not Roger playing Poopie its Rafa playing Scary, good start so far.

Federer survives. 1-1 Nadal serving

kingraf wrote:Federer survives. 1-1 Nadal serving

Nadal survives 2-1  , good game so far, can Fed survive for 2-2  

Rafito's turn to squeeze through

Federer cranking that old diesel through the gears. 2-2

3-2 Nadal match beginning to simmer now. Cue Nadal break

kingraf wrote:3-2 Nadal match beginning to simmer now. Cue Nadal break

Fed ran through without much of a sweat in his last 2 service games  

Told you to cue it.

Still hasn't happened though has it?

Put in ice, then, if you will

Well done Roger, let's see if Rafa can strike back

Typical Nadal, never say die and takes the 2nd set.  

Wish I'd known about this an hour earlier, it was near the end when I realised they were playing. Nice to see Federer firing off winners on match point down, but I missed most of it. How was it?

You'd need to go back a good six-seven years to find a better Fedal three setter. HB. It wasnt quite an instant classic, but the third set was two maestros who had the ball on a string. Best set set of tennis Ive watched this year. There was a ten-fifteen minute period which bordered on the ridiculous. Every single shot in tennis (except the tweener) was brought out. Very good match overall

Hm might be worth checking out the recording if it comes on you tube.

Third consecutive win in the rivalry for Rafa.

Overall analysis:

Federer won the first set because he has that bit of extra skill and tennis brain to deal with less talented individuals. He lost the next 2 because of his legs and not enough intensity, younger guy takes advantage. Luckily Berdych will save tennis!

Berdych won't win

Nadal is just a bad matchup anywhere for Fed, but any trained eye, any unbiased eye could see last night how otherworldly Federers talent is compared to Nadals. All credit to Nadal, he's a beast competitor and the patterns just favor him, but Federer was brilliant for large stretches last nigtht at 32 playing perhaps the worst tennis in 10+ years against his matchup nightmare who is in his prime and playing perhaps the best tennis (on hardcourt especially) of his life. I don't even think the mental demons did Federer in last night. It was just a hard fought match with fantastic tennis from both players, but I have no doubt now that the H2H would have looked a lot different with Fed much closer had Nadal been good enough all those years to consistently face Federer on these type courts.

It gives me hope-- we now can see that a healthy focused Federer able to serve freely and play freely can still be a force. Perhaps the grueling nature of a Major will continue to wear him down to the point where in the latter stages he's gassed, but if he can get a good draw and arrive relatively fit- in a one off match- he can still beat anyone.. Surely time will march on and it will be harder and harder but I wouldn't be shocked to see Federer pull off one more Major over the next 2 years.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how Nadal has suddenly become his hardcourt master... goes from unable to win in his prime and healthy for over two years off of clay, and now suddenly he's nearly unbeatable on hardcourts? someone have an answer for that mystery?

Yeah, Nadal's 2 Majors, 2 other Major finals, a Gold Medal, 7 1000 Master titles, 2 500 titles and a 250 plus 12 other finals on Hard Court in the era of Federer and Djokvic is the sign of a man unable to win...

Had a final appearance in every HC Masters except Cinci aged 21... Nadal's lack of success on HC is not a reflection of his true ability on it, but rather an aberration caused by a guy who doesnt particularly like the surface.

Don't agree with most that TRuffin. Nadal was nowhere near his best last night in the first set, after that and getting more into gear he won 6-4 6-3, could have easily been 6-4 6-1. For all Federer's "otherworldly talent" its odd how he's 21-10 down to someone you fob off as a beast and still lost despite playing extremely well on his favoured fast surface.
Nadal is a beast of a competitor alright but he's also hugely talented himself, as Federer knows all too well. Was Nadal merely a physical beast as a 17 year old beating prime world No. 1 Federer on much faster (then) Miami hardcourt in 2004? Or the just turned 16 year old who reached Wimbledon junior semis? Its easy to discount Nadal as some muscled beast who just wears Federer down but there is a lot to it than that if you've followed Nadal from Day 1. Talent in tennis is too hard to label one way or another, its results that ultimately define talent because its only the very best, the most talented, that build the sort of records Federer and Nadal have amassed.

How anyone can see the precision down-the-line, on-the-line, on-the-run, no-look counter-attack Nadal passing shot and say he is just a Beast is beyond me

ChequeredJersey wrote:Yeah, Nadal's 2 Majors, 2 other Major finals, a Gold Medal, 7 1000 Master titles, 2 500 titles and a 250 plus 12 other finals on Hard Court in the era of Federer and Djokvic is the sign of a man unable to win...

I said "unable to win" for over 2 years off of clay while in his prime.. not in his entire carreer... Once his generation emerged at their peak, Djokovic especially- Nadal did not win one non clay tournament since late 2010 until 2013 IW... take out the time he was off... My question is what changed from then until now? More aggressive, more confidence? Don't tell me it was him "only" losing to Djokovic either- that's a fallacy if you look at the tournaments he palyed.

He's been more aggressive, certainly. On HC the Djoko thing does skew it a bit as he did lose 4 HC Finals to him! Also 2013 is really Wimbledon 2012 as he was injured just after that.

Good to see that the match was very competitive, perhaps this rivalry isn't quite dead yet.

lydian wrote:Don't agree with most that TRuffin. Nadal was nowhere near his best last night in the first set, after that and getting more into gear he won 6-4 6-3, could have easily been 6-4 6-1. For all Federer's "otherworldly talent" its odd how he's 21-10 down to someone you fob off as a beast and still lost despite playing extremely well on his favoured fast surface.
Nadal is a beast of a competitor alright but he's also hugely talented himself, as Federer knows all too well. Was Nadal merely a physical beast as a 17 year old beating prime world No. 1 Federer on much faster (then) Miami hardcourt in 2004? Or the just turned 16 year old who reached Wimbledon junior semis? Its easy to discount Nadal as some muscled beast who just wears Federer down but there is a lot to it than that if you've followed Nadal from Day 1. Talent in tennis is too hard to label one way or another, its results that ultimately define talent because its only the very best, the most talented, that build the sort of records Federer and Nadal have amassed.

could have been... I love when fans change the actual score to could have been... how bout it could have easly been Federer 7-5,6-4.... I never said Nadal is not talented.. the type of skill set/style he has- he's perhaps the most talented def the best at it ever... but he's not as talented a tennis player as Federer though.. and trotting out the usual Nadal fan H2h arguments doesn't make it so.. yeah the talented 17 year old was able to beat #1 Federer in 2004, but was losing constantly at that time to lesser players that Federer dominated on hard courts... So that pretty much tells you it's matchup/pattern issue and always has been/always will be between Federer/Nadal. I've seen Nadal in many a hardcourt match and he's as aggressive and hitting it as well as he ever has... He wasn't playing poorly at the start last night, he was playing well.. upped his level and Federer then one upped him... then they played quite evenly and beautiful for much of the match. Nadal won fair and square, but don't tell me you weren't surprised Federer could play like he did given his recent struggles and dimishing movement.

btw Lydian- we've discussed Federer's core work before or what you felt was his lack of it.. As you've noticed, he seems leaner and more muscular at the core since his Wimbledon loss.. I saw some shirt off practice picture on his website the other day- from his back-- he's absolutely ripped at his core back muscles now.. he's def doing the work needed.

I think he has some tennis left in him.. he can't dominate nor win week in and week out against he inprime Djoko/Nadal generation-- that's just not going to happen 5,6 years older than they and with the miles in his leg... but I think last night showed- if he can navigate the field and get into a late round one off match-- he has a real shot.

Nadal gets so much unfair flak for losing to other players when Federer was at his peak. How dare a 21-year old lose to Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc on Hard?

23 Rafael Nadal 2003 - 2012 Hardcourt 69-15 82.1%

Nadal's winning percentage on HC is the 23rd best in history

Sorry, that's just Slams, ignore that

TRuffin wrote:Nadal is just a bad matchup anywhere for Fed, but any trained eye, any unbiased eye could see last night how otherworldly Federers talent is compared to Nadals.  All credit to Nadal, he's a beast competitor and the patterns just favor him, but Federer was brilliant for large stretches last nigtht at 32 playing perhaps the worst tennis in 10+ years against his matchup nightmare who is in his prime and playing perhaps the best tennis (on hardcourt especially) of his life. I don't even think the mental demons did Federer in last night. It was just a hard fought match with fantastic tennis from both players, but I have no doubt now that the H2H would have looked a lot different with Fed much closer had Nadal been good enough all those years to consistently face Federer on these type courts.

It gives me hope-- we now can see that a healthy focused Federer able to serve freely and play freely can still be a force.  Perhaps the grueling nature of a Major will continue to wear him down to the point where in the latter stages he's gassed, but if he can get a good draw and arrive relatively fit- in a one off match- he can still beat anyone..  Surely time will march on and it will be harder and harder but I wouldn't be shocked to see Federer pull off one more Major over the next 2 years.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how Nadal has suddenly become his hardcourt master... goes from unable to win in his prime and healthy for over two years off of clay, and now suddenly he's nearly unbeatable on hardcourts?  someone have an answer for that mystery?

Rafa is better than Roger and if not for repeated knee injuries would already be equal or past most of Roger's records. Here is a clue as to who is the better player, if after most meetings in grandslam finals one guy leaves the court in tears of anguish and not joy, then probably the other guy is the better player. Nadal was better than Fed as a teenager and has proven again how tenuous fed's claims to GOAThood really are. It just took Nadal a couple of years to adjust his game to grass and hardcourt and once he did his level far surpassed that of the swiss watch salesman.

Oh dear oh dear socal.

I struggle to understand how the quality of your contributions can fluctuate so much, from wholly rational, balanced and well thought-out assessments to the immature and downright tacky.

Swiss watch salesman .... ?? I'm sure you could be even more disrespectful if you really tried, towards a player who countless former greats of the game have described as the best they have ever seen.

You are more than welcome to your views and your many "could have/would have" theories and fantasy speculation ; but when you take such an extreme position in an effort to big up one player over another I firmly believe it has the very opposite effect of what you intended.

I thought we had left this sort of cheap talk behind on the old 606, and it really is beneath such an 'established' member of the forum as you socal.

oh PS Ruffin the answer to the mystery is Djokovic beating him in multiple hardcourt finals, the rest of the tour bent over and dropped trousers for Rafa in 2011. and 2012.

lags72 wrote:Oh dear oh dear socal.

I struggle to understand how the quality of your contributions can fluctuate so much, from wholly rational, balanced and well thought-out assessments to the immature and downright tacky.

Swiss watch salesman .... ?? I'm sure you could be even more disrespectful if you really tried, towards a player who countless former greats of the game have described as the best they have ever seen.

You are more than welcome to your views and your many "could have/would have" theories and fantasy speculation ; but when you take such an extreme position in an effort to big up one player over another I firmly believe it has the very opposite effect of what you intended.

I thought we had left this sort of cheap talk behind on the old 606, and it really is beneath such an 'established' member of the forum as you socal.

I am just tired of being ridiculed and insulted for being right. Did you rush to my defense Lags and chastise Lydian and BB when they claimed I had a sub-100 iq for claiming that Nadal of recent years was superior to Nadal of 07/08? Where was you indignation then, or do you serve your lectures and chastisement only for me, if that is the case I am not interested.

Sorry, if you keep pumping this superiority of Federer over and over again when the other guy keeps beating him you leave yourself open to scorn. As for hypotheticals, I doubt Nadal will have to rely on hypotheticals in the debate of who is the better player vis a vis Federer. Federer's claim to goathood rests more on Nadal's bum leg than on any of his own accomplishments. He was surpassed in his peak by a much younger pre-peak rival who has only improved since then.

Well, there you have a perfect example of precisely why I said I struggle to understand you socal.

You accuse me of "pumping this superiority of Federer over and over again" when the reality is that I have done absolutely nothing of the sort, and you will find no posts from me taking such a stance. Ironically, many of my recent contributions have revolved around my strong admiration for Rafa and most notably his tremendous performances during the course of this season since his return.

And hence this misrepresentation of the truth then leads you to allege that I leave myself "open to scorn" for things that I have never even said.

I hope you can get back to a more rational approach soon socal, because there's little point in debating with you once you're off into this sort of territory. Meanwhile I leave you to peddle your false personal allegations, although I doubt they do you any benefit in the eyes of the many balanced and fair-minded posters here on the forum.

Lags, I didn't say you, my post was in relation to Ruffin who keeps talking up Roger's obvious superiority. YOu responeded to my response to Ruffin. And I find it mind boggling that you never take people who insult me and take a run at me to task for their behavior you only save you lectures and nagging for me. Do you think it is appropriate to be called unhinged and that I have sub-100 iq? Where was your indignation there. Again, my post was directed at Ruffin, that is why I quoted him, it makes no accusation towards you. But Ruffin is quite beyond the pale of reason with all this nonsense about Roger's obvious superiority clap trap.

socal1976 wrote:
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how Nadal has suddenly become his hardcourt master... goes from unable to win in his prime and healthy for over two years off of clay, and now suddenly he's nearly unbeatable on hardcourts?  someone have an answer for that mystery?
Rafa is better than Roger and if not for repeated knee injuries would already be equal or past most of Roger's records. Here is a clue as to who is the better player, if after most meetings in grandslam finals one guy leaves the court in tears of anguish and not joy, then probably the other guy is the better player. Nadal was better than Fed as a teenager and has proven again how tenuous fed's claims to GOAThood really are. It just took Nadal a couple of years to adjust his game to grass and hardcourt and once he did his level far surpassed that of the swiss watch salesman.

Why not we apply the same barrier and say Djoko was so lucky to win multiple slams coz Fed out of prime and Nadal's knee injuries mean a transition era and hence very lucky to be a transitional champ, only fool will say such comment like you did.