Don't Look, Don't Listen!

If you like watching entertaining tennis featuring the best player in the world playing some excellent tennis then I can recommend that you watch a repeat of the much anticipated third round AO match between Nadal and Monfils   

The world No 1 produced a masterclass to reach the fourth round and a showdown with Kei Nishikori. Nadal was sublime in demolishing Monfils who, despite the scoreline, played some of his best tennis in Melbourne.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/australianopen/10581267/Australian-Open-2014-Rafael-Nadal-v-Gael-Monfils-live.html

But if the thought of the number one player in the world playing well is a little scary

The demolition of Monfils will undoubtedly have been watched grimly by rivals Roger Federer and Andy Murray, with the Spaniard likely to be a huge roadblock to their title hopes in the semi-finals.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/australian-open-men-nadal-v-monfils-live-092022512--ten.html

I went court side for a few games Rafa was so impressive it was scary

https://twitter.com/bgtennisnation

Then maybe it will be better that you don't watch and don't listen?    Much easier if you don't see that devastating backhand. Take comfort in the error count given to Monfils  

Christ, Monfils must have been bad in the first two rounds if that was his best tennis in Melbourne. Was it the three doubles to gift a break in the second set or the way he fell away after failing to break in the third?

Rafa was very impressive - on a par with Djokovic last night - but Monfils didn't cover himself with glory.

"The demolition of Monfils will undoubtedly have been watched grimly by rivals Roger Federer and Andy Murray"  

Hmm only Donald Young hit fewer winners today than Rafael. Only Bruno Paire hit more unforced errors today than Monfils. Sorry that tells me this match was low on competitive tennis, high on errors and nowhere near even the match of the day. Rafael was clinical very clinical wearing his opponent down but Monfils didn't take much wearing down as he threw around errors like confetti.

Julius. Not if they have read my advice  

CC. Well done! Exactly how many unforced errors did Monfils make? Yes Nadal ran a lot too.

Monfils made 57 unforced errors just two less than Paire. That is poor quality however you may want to paint it. Heck he was so long with shots it was frightening. Once I swear he hit the backboard.

I thought it was a good performance by Rafa. You need a player pushing you to play your best. It's not like athletics where Bolt can run 9.6 facing school kids - the ball needs to come back for you to unleash winners, no?

It was good perhaps very good but certainly not 'one of the best performances seen on this court for years' or 'the best Rafael has ever played' as claimed by the commentators. Even Rafa afterwards merely left it at it being his best performance of the tournament which is far more accurate.

As I said on the match thread judging quality by UE-winner ratio doesn't reveal the picture of the match. There were many long ralleys and the match was much more competitive than the scoreline suggested with loads of multi-deuce games. It wasn't Rafa's top 10 performance ever, no way...but it was still mightily good given Monfils was a genuine threat. However, we all know the true tests lie ahead.

Yes Rafael played good but if I were him I wouldn't be getting too far ahead of himself. We keep hearing about Monfils and what a talent he is but sorry there is a lot missing from his game that holds him back.

Do you think Nadal is the kind of guy who gets ahead of himself?

No. Thankfully, he doesn't but commentators and one of his fans on here (not you) does.

I didn't watch it.

But I'm completely certain that Rafa beating the world #32 with 21 winners was not the best performance ever seen on the RLA.

think Rafa's best week one performance (in any slam) was his demolition job over Haas in Australia 2009...Think it was 50 winners to 17 odd errors. Just looked it up. matchstat says it was 53 winners to eight errors. Stats aren't everything, but Haas isn't a chump, and he was shown the the truth that night.

Good shout, KR.

Can anyone think of a better AO performance than Federer v Roddick in 07? I'd struggle to think of a better that I've watched.

An interesting side debate is....just what were Rafa's best performances ever? In relative terms I can never look beyond the audacity of beating defending RG champ Albert Costa at Monte Carlo Masters 2003 as 16 year old in straights. Outrageous. Beating #1 Federer at Miami 2004 as a 17 year old was pretty ridiculous too. Lest we forget the talent of this guy...not the power or fitness, just the outrageous talent this guy showed at an age most boys are learning the fundamentals.

PS...for AO...Safin v Federer 05, Nadal v Verdasco 09, Roddick v El Aynaoui 03

Rafael beating Roger at Wimbledon for me. That established him as Roger was seen as infallible on the grass and certainly not beatable by clay court specialist Nadal.

I thought Rafa's performance in USO last year was near perfect. A wonderful performance.

I also rate his AO09 final as higher than the SF v Verdasco. Best Fedal match in my opinion.

Miami 04 v Fed is right up there too. His BH back then seemed very different to how it is now.

Had a look at Safin vs Federer 2005 the other day... It has not aged well.

I'm sure it's still better than Djokovic and Murray hitting the ball to each other.

Many matches don't age well but at the time they're amazing.
Rafa vs Roger RG 05 semi was pretty special too.

Disagree re feds safin. Great ball striking, attacking tennis and shot making.

Just had a look at Federer Nadal 2005 RG. Skimmed through it, but it's a ridiculously high level of tennis when it gets good. Also noticed Federer who usually suffers in silence begin to grunt on his serve and forehand when it got tight - Looked at a loss planning wise. If he had a time capsule... it would suck to find out it doesn't get any better later on.

Yep KR, it was a great match. Lets face it these 2 have been spoiling us for years...both ridiculously talented, both playing the game in very different ways. 2 all time greats playing many great matches down the years. We'll realise how lucky we were when they've both hung up the racquet and we look back.

Exactly LS, that match was great. Safin's ground strokes were staggering when he was on. His match at AO the previous year vs Agassi was also stupendous.

hawkeye wrote:Julius. Not if they have read my advice  

CC. Well done! Exactly how many unforced errors did Monfils make? Yes Nadal ran a lot too.

Nadal needs to run a lot, that's why he sees a gynaecologist.

I used to be a runner, having a good gynaecologist was always important.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Rafael beating Roger at Wimbledon for me. That established him as Roger was seen as infallible on the grass and certainly not beatable by clay court specialist Nadal.

That was the most amazing match but Nadal should have wrapped it up in two. Looking back it's great that he didn't though    One of the reasons it was so dramatic was because Nadal had Federer on the ropes in the 2007 Wimbledon final ("Can't you switch that thing off" yelled Federer about Hawkeye as he unraveled) and if he lost again from such a winning position it could have affected their rivalry and perhaps the whole tennis landscape (at least for a while)

Nadal also got to the final in 2006 and I can remember that well because that tournament was the first time I saw Nadal play. I thought he was pretty good   But one of the things that I thought odd is that every time he played the commentators just like CC told me he was a clay court specialist and couldn't play on grass. I thought it was funny as he looked like he was doing it pretty well to me. I find it even more funny that some consider a player that had got to the Wimbledon final three years in a row and had a positive H2H with his opponent and had destroyed that same opponent in a slam final just two weeks previously had no chance ("certainly not beatable by a clay court specialist"). The only possible way they could have come to that conclusion was if they had been following the advice I have offered here. ie "Don't Look, Don't Listen".

lydian wrote:Many matches don't age well but at the time they're amazing.
Rafa vs Roger RG 05 semi was pretty special too.

Sigh! I wish I had seen that.

Your wish is....well brief highlights.
Look at Nadal's first FH winner!
Tennis is not played any better today 9 years on....9 years!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgak8FGvNo0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7-qGDrrH4o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9GCYlZmF34

HM Murdoch wrote:Good shout, KR.

Can anyone think of a better AO performance than Federer v Roddick in 07? I'd struggle to think of a better that I've watched.

Gee.... this thread has so quickly moved into Nostalgia-land !! Even if nostalgia isn't what it used to be   

But I agree with HMM re that AO performance by the Fed in '07.

Roddick's post-match presser that day is perhaps the most entertaining I have ever seen ; although in fairness to Roddick he took the loss like a man and offered some admirable reflections on tennis and his life in general.

It includes the gem where he reacts with wonderful sarcasm to a cheeky journo by saying "ok, so if there were rankings for press conferences, you reckon I'd have no trouble getting in the top 5, right .....?"

lydian wrote:Your wish is....well brief highlights.
Look at Nadal's first FH winner!
Tennis is not played any better today 9 years on....9 years!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgak8FGvNo0

Wow cracking stuff! All that talent passion and energy on one court. There is a sign of things to come with a shoulder shrug and shake of head from a baby faced Federer at a baby Nadal (at about 1.50) and a very respectful shake of hands at the net. But it has left me feeling even more sad that I missed this unfold   Lydian did you watch this match live? If so I would be interested if you can remember what you thought about it at the time.

It's staggering that Nadal was only 18 in that RG05 match. When you look at that and even the 20 year old Djokovic (below), it's depressing how the next generation had nobody like that.  I think their teenage incarnations would beat the Raonic, Dimi, Nishikori etc of today.

HM Murdoch wrote:It's staggering that Nadal was only 18 in that RG05 match. When you look at that and even the 20 year old Djokovic (below), it's depressing how the next generation had nobody like that.  I think their teenage incarnations would beat the Raonic, Dimi, Nishikori etc of today. ...

Federer was also pretty good.  Young Nadal and Djokovic still had to play out of their skins to beat Federer.  He never handed anything to them on a plate - at least to begin with.  Nadal did eventually find a way to beat Federer on the clay quite "easily" ... which is why despite Federer's 17 grand slams only 1 of them was a French Open.  I suppose like all top sportspeople Federer hated losing and you could tell it in his demeanour.

It seems to me that Nadal and Djokovic reached their physical peak quite early on in their careers (a bit like Del Potro) when Federer was more or less at his peak. Since then of course Nadal & Djokovic have become more experienced and versatile and can manage their matches much better while Federer has declined physically (reaction speed etc).

Nadal was certainly an early developer physically. Novak less so but what strikes me when I watch the videos above is how much better their movement is than the subsequent generation. They just look like superior athletes - better speed, better agility. In Nadal's case, greater strength too, his biceps are colossal!

I wish I'd been following tennis more at the time when Federer was about 20-21. I'd love to have really watched his emergence.

Federer sort of went under the radar until he beat Sampras in 2001 and even after that I didn't pay much attention to him except to note that he was Tim Henman's bunny, which was great. Plus he had a ponytail which is enough to put anyone off.
I don't think the general public watched his emergence any more than a few other players.

Fed overlooked the importance of physique in his early career - a mistake I doubt he'd be allowed to make these days.

HE - I watched it and many at the time said Feds didn't play as well as many hoped but Rafa had a part to play in that as he played pretty well.
"I started bad and finished bad," Federer said. "I was good in the middle, but that was not good enough."
"All in all, I'm not happy with my performance," said Federer, who had 62 unforced errors to Nadal's 32.

It was now nearly 8 p.m. and, with no lights at Roland Garros, it was apparent that the match might have to be suspended if it went five sets. A fifth set probably would not even be started after 9 p.m.

Racing to beat the fading light and Federer, Nadal closed out the third set at 8:40 p.m. when he broke Federer in the final game.

"I could hardly see the ball in the end," said Federer, the 23-year-old holder of four major titles. "I am disappointed we continued. ... I wished we could have continued tomorrow.
A very honest guy but maybe he had the hump that day.

That jumping fed bh roar is a classic

JuliusHMarx wrote:Federer sort of went under the radar until he beat Sampras in 2001 and even after that I didn't pay much attention to him except to note that he was Tim Henman's bunny, which was great. Plus he had a ponytail which is enough to put anyone off.
I don't think the general public watched his emergence any more than a few other players.

Fed overlooked the importance of physique in his early career - a mistake I doubt he'd be allowed to make these days.

Was there ever a sense he was something special before he became something special? Or was it just "that guy plays some nice shots"?

It's a very unusual career trajectory. Never beyond a QF, then first slam in July 03 and then straight into a three-slam year in 04!

We all took note when he beat Sampras. In my case I was mightily relieved that Henman didn't have to play Sampras and even more pleased that he beat Federer in the next round.

The talent (oops, that word) was always there, but before 2003 at Wimby, you wondered if he could put it all together and keep it there - the way we still do about, say, Tsonga - or whether he would be brilliant one match, only to fail the next.

HM Murdoch wrote:It's a very unusual career trajectory. Never beyond a QF, then first slam in July 03 and then straight into a three-slam year in 04!

Not that unusual - very similar to Dimitrov's

HM Murdoch wrote:Was there ever a sense he was something special before he became something special? Or was it just "that guy plays some nice shots"?

It's a very unusual career trajectory. Never beyond a QF, then first slam in July 03 and then straight into a three-slam year in 04!

I remember reading in a paper prior to 2003 Wimbledon that he was among the favourites, but was considered 'talented but erratic', and all depended on his ability to hold his temperament together and remain consistent. Pretty much as JHM says. I didn't see much of him prior to that tournament either, the Sampras win excepted. I'd guess it was the same for most people!

Good highlights in the thread, chaps; very entertaining. Federer has a reputation versus Nadal on clay, so it's easy to forget that he's either #2 or #3 on the surface in his generation, and likely to be threatening the top 10 AT. He's beaten Nadal twice, and rarely hands it to him on a plate - note that Djokovic, to date, only has three wins against Nadal on clay. However, Novak is vastly more likely to win another one!

Nadal is a more rounded player these days. In the Fed highlights, he's incredibly unwilling to go the forehand side no matter how pinned Federer is, whereas nowadays he's happier to even rally with the Federer forehand in regular play.

I for once would love to know why Falla, a tennis player who personally I have barely heard of in my life, is such high ranked on that very meaningful chart. Could you do this research for us all hawky, very graetful in advance!

As for Nadal, if you Google the name you get the world "doping" as first topic searched on the internet. Would it be possible that it was the same case on twitter? b  

Most notable thing about those early clashes is the amount of Service return winners Rafa was striking. Not Agassi-esque, but he seemed intent on making a very clear statement to Roger... "You half-ass this, I'm going to punish you".

Not every player is the same, I suppose - some like Nadal find the blueprint quite early and keep at it.... Others like Djokovic seem to find it and then forget it for a while. Federer seemed to stumble onto it and then drive it like it's stolen...

LuvSports! wrote:HE - I watched it and many at the time said Feds didn't play as well as many hoped but Rafa had a part to play in that as he played pretty well.
"I started bad and finished bad," Federer said. "I was good in the middle, but that was not good enough."
"All in all, I'm not happy with my performance," said Federer, who had 62 unforced errors to Nadal's 32.

It was now nearly 8 p.m. and, with no lights at Roland Garros, it was apparent that the match might have to be suspended if it went five sets. A fifth set probably would not even be started after 9 p.m.

Racing to beat the fading light and Federer, Nadal closed out the third set at 8:40 p.m. when he broke Federer in the final game.

"I could hardly see the ball in the end," said Federer, the 23-year-old holder of four major titles. "I am disappointed we continued. ... I wished we could have continued tomorrow.
A very honest guy but maybe he had the hump that day.

That jumping fed bh roar is a classic

The W2008 was also played in the gloaming. IMVHO, the results could have been different otherwise. Perhaps Nadal dealt better with conditions than Federer did. We can speculate all we want, but does not change history in any way.

  

CaledonianCraig wrote:Monfils made 57 unforced errors just two less than Paire.  That is poor quality however you may want to paint it. Heck he was so long with shots it was frightening. Once I swear he hit the backboard.

But steady there CC. Rafa is by far and away the best player at this event as shown by his results in 2010, 11 and 12   

LuvSports! wrote:HE - I watched it and many at the time said Feds didn't play as well as many hoped but Rafa had a part to play in that as he played pretty well.
"I started bad and finished bad," Federer said. "I was good in the middle, but that was not good enough."
"All in all, I'm not happy with my performance," said Federer, who had 62 unforced errors to Nadal's 32.

Ha ha! Federer was obviously doing the "Don't look, don't listen" and just count the unforced error thing to stop himself being too scared   But really who could blame him? That crazy teenager couldn't really be a match for a multi slam winning great... Could he?

LuvSports. Can you remember what you thought at the time about the match?

Feds was out of sorts, his execution was way off but Nadal played well. They have had better clay matches imo.

banbrotam wrote:  

CaledonianCraig wrote:Monfils made 57 unforced errors just two less than Paire.  That is poor quality however you may want to paint it. Heck he was so long with shots it was frightening. Once I swear he hit the backboard.

But steady there CC. Rafa is by far and away the best player at this event as shown by his results in 2010, 11 and 12   

Yes this is true after winning in '09 Rafa's results at the AO have been Injured, Injured, Lost in 5th set after being a break up, didn't play because he was injured.

So Rafa hasn't won the event in the last 4 years and his opponent made all those unforced errors. As long as you don't watch or listen this year he isn't scary at all  

LuvSports! wrote:Feds was out of sorts, his execution was way off but Nadal played well. They have had better clay matches imo.

So you thought Fed would "right the ship" and the crazy teenager had had a good day? I wish I could watch that match fresh so I could judge it without knowing what happened next. I would like to know what I would think.

The big surprise of FO 2005 was Puerta getting to the final.

In the three years before 2005, Fed had lost in the 1st Rd (twice) and the 3rd Rd of the FO, which is a pretty poor record for the 2nd greatest clay court player of his generation. He just was just never that great on clay, and a loss to Rafa, at that time No. 4 seed and already a clay court maestro, was not really a great surprise.