Another Rosol in the making?

Your article needs a paragraph on Rosol; what you mean by "another Rosol in the making"?

I don't want to prejudge the matter and assume what you think before I give the answer.

That aside, it's always nice to read about young players make these breakthroughs, even if they are temporary, as there are so many more who don't and we never hear about them.

I share NITB's point here. The question needs to be specific. And what is new or so particular about a player like Rosol to use him as an example of a type of player? Only because he beat Nadal at the 2nd round at Wimbledon? We all knew it almost happened a few times to Nadal as he is more vulnerable during the first week there as the grass is fresher and hence faster. He almost lost to Isner at FO 2011 when the balls were faster and he needed more time to adapt. Anyways, we need specifics. As there is only one Luckas Rosol in the ATP (to be checked though ) so far as there is only one Marius Copil...

Hard to gauge really

Rosol was 26 when duffed up Nadal. Also it was done at a Slam.

Let's see where Copil goes from here as it is one thing doing it at a Slam and another doing it at ATP 500 level.

LK... agreed. Others are of similar sentiment.

I guess the true question is that is Copil's result another Rosol in the view of a one off career best result.

Copil was Mayered last night/this morning.

Consistency

Of course consistency is the issue for the lower ranked players as they surely would be much higher ranked if they were consistently playing their best. Also beating Cilic is not the same as beating Nadal due to the same consistency issue as the former is surely not as consistent as the latter. So Copil's feat and Rosol's one cannot be compared that easily. Also while talking about Rosol, some claimed that he would have beat anyone in that 5th set but I beg to differ. Do we really think that he could have beat Federer on Wimbledon indoors? It is good to find excuses for Nadal's losses bar the usual injury card, which he ended up by using anyways, but that one about Rosol would have beat any other player, no. Furthermore, in terms of consistency at slams, I still believe Fed ranks higher with his 34 consecutive QFs, so his probability of losing before the second week of a slam is remote. True Rafa cannot be that far behind but he is still behind and in a non negligible way...

sphairistike wrote: Also while talking about Rosol, some claimed that he would have beat anyone in that 5th set but I beg to differ. Do we really think that he could have beat Federer on Wimbledon indoors?.

I have wondered more than once what would have happened if Nadal never lost that match, but squeezed through like often did in the past....would he have reached the final, played OG, been "injured" ?....

I guess you are leading me to another thread there...