Re: ATP World Tour Finals LONDON 2013

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:54 pm

luvsports! wrote:13 slams = a doomed approach?

Indeed...
Also even against his toughest opponent Djokovic this doomed approach has led him to win 6 of the last 9 matches.

by SayonaRa Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:33 pm

luvsports! wrote:13 slams = a doomed approach?

How many without PEDs? Winking

by SayonaRa Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:41 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:
SR wrote:
Julia Santamaria wrote:If 63 64 is a crushing, I suppose 63 61 60 is a tightly contested match.
That’s a loaded sentence but I don’t see how it even has the remotest relevance to the quote i provided.

A loss is a loss. Who cares how you describe the defeat as long as we know that he failed the WTF test again this year? But if you insist, it’s not unfair to say he was crushed given the fact that he was beaten rather easily in straights. I think Tenez already pointed out that nadal was Djoko’s easiest opponent in London. So yes, if you just open your eyes to the wtf context, nadal was crushed.
63 64 can be argued as a convincing win, but not as a crushing win.

If you argue that 6-3 6-4 was a crushing, then how was 6-3 6-1 6-0?
Was that a crushing too? A mega ultra crushing?

Call it anything you wish. It doesn't matter one iota. The point is, Fed went on to win FO after that 63 61 60 loss.and then, viola, everything else he previously lost to nadal in FO was redeemed and forgotten just like that. Only petty-minded nadal fans cling on desperately to 63 61 60 that means nothing to most people, as it did not prevent Fed from achieving his 17 plus numerous other unsurpassed records most people remember him for.

But nadal’s loss yesterday, regardless of the score, means a lot more, as it magnifies nadal’s long-standing problem of not closing a big gap in his tennis career. While Fed has nothing more to prove, nadal does. That’s all you’ve to know. Funny you’re so defensive over a loss when there’s nothing to defend.

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:50 pm

Where did I say it dented Federer's career?
All I am saying is that it was a bigger crushing than a 6-3 6-4 loss.

by Daniel Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:54 pm

luvsports! wrote:13 slams = a doomed approach?

I was talking about the match last night against Djokovic and his approach was doomed. We all saw it. As for his slams, 8 of them are on a surface that suits that 1 dimensional approach. But indoor hard against Djokovic, the approach is always doomed to fail and it did. Slow surfaces and modern racquets have allowed him to be a 13 time Slam champion.

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:56 pm

His approach has caused Djokovic more trouble in Slams than anyone else this year.

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:56 pm

Once again, ridiculous hypoerbole by Nadal haters.

by Daniel Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:57 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:His approach has caused Djokovic more trouble in Slams than anyone else this year.

Off clay, you mean what? One win at the US Open? He was smashed out in R1 of Wimbledon, hiding at the Aussie Open (lying that he had a virus lol). Your statement makes absolutely no sense. And as for the French Open, Djokovic could and should have won it., He threw it away from being a break up in the final set. Nadal didn't win it, Djokovic lost it.

His approach stopped a misfiring Djokovic in 1 nonclay slam. The US Open. Indoor hard, he couldn't even touch Djokovic. He was that beaten.

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:02 pm

You forgot to make a pathetic excuse for Cincinatti.

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:04 pm

If you feel my statement makes no sense, let me explain it again.
These are Djokovic's losses in Grand Slams this year.
Nadal (x2)
Murray (x1)

So Nadal has troubled Djokovic the most in Grand Slams. (and to be fair Djokovic has troubled Nadal the most overall, so it works both ways)
Does that make sense?

by N2D2L Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:08 pm

And as for the French Open, Djokovic could and should have won it., He threw it away from being a break up in the final set. Nadal didn't win it, Djokovic lost it.

Nadal hit double the winners than Djokovic in the final set of the French Open, and a higher percentage of winners were touching the line.
You seem quite upset after that French Open smiley

btw were you homogenised from v2?

by noleisthebest Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:44 pm

Tenez wrote:Where is NITB? she probably fell asleep behind the sofa again!

Ooooooh...I've just woken up!
Who won?

by Tenez Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:05 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
Tenez wrote:Where is NITB? she probably fell asleep behind the sofa again!
Ooooooh...I've just woken up!
Who won?

Not tennis for sure!

by noleisthebest Wed Nov 13, 2013 4:17 pm

You don't leave a short ball unpunished, do you...

by Tenez Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:58 pm

noleisthebest wrote:You don't leave a short ball unpunished, do you...

?

by noleisthebest Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:46 pm

Tenez wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:You don't leave a short ball unpunished, do you...
?

A bit like this:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3TnUOKP88MI

by luvsports! Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:16 pm

haha nice line nitb, permission to use that some time?

by noleisthebest Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:20 pm

luvsports! wrote:haha nice line nitb, permission to use that some time?

No problemo Cool

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:30 pm

Just read that Nadal made 2 FH and 2 BH winners all match against Djokovic. So you can see why it is viewed as a crushing despite the scoreline.

by noleisthebest Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:55 pm

legendkillar wrote:Just read that Nadal made 2 FH and 2 BH winners all match against Djokovic. So you can see why it is viewed as a crushing despite the scoreline.

To me the loss can be viewed as crushing only because Nadal failed to win the only trophy missing in his collection now, because he suffered another loss to Nole and had to suffer the humiliation of being world number one, having GOAT ambitions and being useless indoors.
He will soon forget it, though.
As soon as his FH gets the higher bounce, which unfortunately will be at all tournaments up to Wimbledon, he'll have the physical advantage over EVERYONE, incl Novak.
He knows it, and I'm sure he can't wait for a revenge.
I hope Nole keeps denying him it by serving well and shortening points as much as possible.
Since USO, Nadal is in a physical league of his own. It really is scary to watch him bully on the court with his brutal power and kill any flair that comes from the other side of the net.
Something truly needs to be done about it.
Tennis fans want to watch Federer as long as possible, and with conditions being so slow, they are shortening his career and kiling tennis.

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:05 pm

It's down to the ATP and ITF to address the issue because it is going to lead to shorter peaks in careers. I mean where do the ITF and ATP see as the future of tennis. Careers are being killed off. I mean like at the blue print that was Hewitt and look at his body. That is where exactly the likes of Nadal, Murray and even Djokovic are going to end up like with this punishing tennis they play.

I agree that changes need to be made, but not to the detriment of one player alone. There needs to be something for everyone. Speed up Wimbledon and the US Open and speed up the other events. There needs to be variation and at the moment the tour is lacking that in spades. Wimbledon should go rogue and speed things up just like the courts used to be. That way it sends a clear message of intent. Give something to everyone. Players are not getting the same slice of the pie.

by noleisthebest Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:21 pm

I admit, it would be absolutely wonderful to see a fast Wimbledon as well as USO.
RG used to be great, too.
The real problem I feel is doping which is allowing players to last long in rallies.
But, as we have established here, it's all just another entertainment business after all, or The Show, as Nadal calls it.
People running tournaments don't care about tennis as long as tickets are selling.
Maybe we should all start a petition and have it signed around as many tennis forums as possible, you just don't know, it may even work!

POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!! diva

by Daniel Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:28 pm

I don't think it is doping, but the word dope is definitely there. Dopy ATP.

by noleisthebest Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:11 pm

FedererKing wrote:I don't think it is doping, but the word dope is definitely there. Dopy ATP.

It took me a while to understand it is, and how widespread it is as well.
To me, Nadal was obvious from the very beginning, but not the others. Big muscles, never ending energy to hit the ball as hard as he liked and as long as he needed to, mega left bicep, beating my favourite player on pure "muscles" in ugly, physical matches all the time...
On top of it all, I knew virtually nothing about doping. I thought dopers had to have big muscles and that was it.
I was one lazy watcher, didn't engage my brain and didn't see the obvious.
Then one day I decided to run an experiment and try it out myself, I played a few long rallies and I "got it" straight away. And I did not even bash the ball.
I am not a fitness machine like pro players, but am fit enough to be able to understand that 6 hours is a very long time to spend on a tennis court hitting the ball non-stop as well as running.

Nobody enjoyed it: the players, the Melbourne crowd, people by TVs/computers, me "suffering" behind the sofa thinking Nole lost because my mum did not ring for hours to share happy news as she always does after he wins a tournament.

Now that I can see it, I can't believe others can't, don't or refuse to want to.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:29 pm

legendkiller,
I think you know my opinion on your postings; I think you're a fantastic analyst and also a fierce debater.
But why do you come on from time to time to agree and nod along to what the majority on here believe, but then I see on v2 you write posts which are quite pro-Nadal, and even one I saw recently where it seemed like you criticised a few posters here (and I think even Tenez himself will admit he only supported Djokovic in the final because it was against Nadal- so your criticism is fair in many regards).
But yet you never bring that here, or any disagreements etc.
Considering you have a lot of tennis knowledge, and aren't afraid of debating, I ask why?
btw take this question to you as a complement, not as an insult.

by Daniel Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:42 pm

See the reason I don't think Nadal is a prolific doper is because he isn't that stupid. It's possible he HAS done it, along with a lot of others, but what guy is going to risk public humiliation and the removal of all his awards by continuing to dope...? He certainly wouldn't dope all year round that would be suicide. It's just very far fetched in my view for doping to be that prolific. The main reason he is successful is because this is the "Nadal era" of tennis... boring 1 dimensional surfaces and conditions, and the sooner we are out of "nadal era" the better.

The funny thing is, Federer has outdone Nadal in Nadal-era.

Nadal is also a liar and very dishonest. He may claim he doesn't go to the gym much but it's a lie. You only have to look at his antics on court with all those tics to realize his head is right the way up his Spanish arse. I have very good reasons for disliking the lout, but I have to disagree with the doping theory... it doesn't stack up. I'd feel more confident about it if I knew he was honest on court and with the rules... but he isn't.

by noleisthebest Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:29 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:legendkiller,
I think you know my opinion on your postings; I think you're a fantastic analyst and also a fierce debater.
But why do you come on from time to time to agree and nod along to what the majority on here believe, but then I see on v2 you write posts which are quite pro-Nadal, and even one I saw recently where it seemed like you criticised a few posters here (and I think even Tenez himself will admit he only supported Djokovic in the final because it was against Nadal- so your criticism is fair in many regards).
But yet you never bring that here, or any disagreements etc.
Considering you have a lot of tennis knowledge, and aren't afraid of debating, I ask why?
btw take this question to you as a complement, not as an insult.

Now that you mentioned LK posting here, we do need a Murray fan.
Gallery Play is the only one I think.

As for why LK comes here, we've all known each other from BBC 606 days long before v2.

I know it's hard for you to come to terms with it, but tennis is bigger than agreeing or disagreeing on Nadal, JS, nobody here will be banned for liking or disliking a player like some of us were on v2.
To ban someone polite and knowledgeable like Tenez from a forum does not say a lot about it.

by Daniel Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:32 pm

nobody here will be banned for liking or disliking a player like some of us were on v2.
To ban someone polite and knowledgeable like Tenez from a forum does not say a lot about it.

Like all of us were? :P

And yeah, totally agreed. Banning people for their opinions on tennis or players is not how you make a forum great.

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:37 pm

Julia Santamaria wrote:legendkiller,
I think you know my opinion on your postings; I think you're a fantastic analyst and also a fierce debater.
But why do you come on from time to time to agree and nod along to what the majority on here believe, but then I see on v2 you write posts which are quite pro-Nadal, and even one I saw recently where it seemed like you criticised a few posters here (and I think even Tenez himself will admit he only supported Djokovic in the final because it was against Nadal- so your criticism is fair in many regards).
But yet you never bring that here, or any disagreements etc.
Considering you have a lot of tennis knowledge, and aren't afraid of debating, I ask why?
btw take this question to you as a complement, not as an insult.

I wasn't agreeing with anyone Julia.

My stance was I don't agree that change should be forced upon for example to prolong the achievements of Federer. My point is and I think you would agree that the tour for years now has lacked variation. There needs to be a balance struck because what you have is a lot of fit guys who are dominating the sport and to a point stiffled growth from the youth ranks. This is not the fault of the players, but the people who make the rules and run the tournaments. The tour is heavily reliant on Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and even Murray. Tennis needs some new heroes for tennis to thrive long term. My concern is for the game's long term health which isn't looking good.

I went on many forums the night Nadal was defeated and trust me when I say this forum is light on criticism of Nadal compared to other sites and my observation was that many Federer fans took pleasure in the defeat of Nadal. To me it is sad if all we watch tennis for is the defeat of others. To me if you don't like it, don't watch it. I get by without watching Ferrer if I can help it.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:08 pm

LK, I agree with you on the variety aspect, infact I said yesterday that we should have a better split.
I was talking about your 'crushing comment' (and perhaps you can consider whether Wawrinka crushed Djokovic in the first 8 games of their semi, considering Djokovic was 5-3 up but had hit ZERO winners compared to 6 from Wawrinka), and it seems to be unnecessarily agreeing with the general trend on this forum.
I also know you don't agree with people here on everything (although you don't disagree on everything either), but I've never seen you come out and disagree with people especially when they start posting with extremist tendencies.

many Federer fans took pleasure in the defeat of Nadal. To me it is sad if all we watch tennis for is the defeat of others. To me if you don't like it, don't watch it.

Wise words LK, I agree 100% with this.

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:32 pm

Ah the crushing comment. I didn't say it was a crushing, but with the stats provided I suggested why it was seen as a crushing. It was a flat performance by Nadal, but Djokovic restricted the space and time Nadal had on court. I myself wouldn't use the term crushing, but it wasn't far from it.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:37 pm

legendkillar wrote:Ah the crushing comment. I didn't say it was a crushing, but with the stats provided I suggested why it was seen as a crushing. It was a flat performance by Nadal, but Djokovic restricted the space and time Nadal had on court. I myself wouldn't use the term crushing, but it wasn't far from it.

I'd say comfortable, not crushing.

Remember Djokovic got a lucky net cord when serving for the first set, if that had fallen the other way Nadal would have been back in the set.
Edit: I still think Djokovic would have won anyway, but it may have been a tighter match.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:39 pm

Anyway LK, my main point was no the crushing thing, it is that you never really argue against people, even if your opinion differs in many ways.
I've seen many pro-Nadal posts on v2 from you, but never on here? (I can't remember one).

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:40 pm

Matches you find can be decided by little things. Take the Wawrinka slip in the TB against Nadal. Could've swung the momentum in that match smiley

by legendkillar Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:45 pm

I am not one for arguing to be honest Julia. I find it easier to accept other peoples views even if they differ from mine. I used to argue but found it never made for an interesting debate.

I don't agree with some things are said, but accept that people will have different views.

I don't mind Rafa, but I am not into him like some others who might be. Same with Federer I guess

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:59 pm

legendkillar wrote:Matches you find can be decided by little things. Take the Wawrinka slip in the TB against Nadal. Could've swung the momentum in that match

Indeed.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:08 pm

By argue I meant debate LK.
It's not necessarily a case of arguing, but putting forward your opinion which is different from somebody else's.

I know you have many different opinions on many aspects of tennis, but it seems to be you selectively choose the opinions of yours which are also held by many people on here.
For example in your v2 article 'Beauty and the Beast' you talked about how Nadal had talent via 'guts and mental strength' (and that is a direct quote). But we don't see you post that sort of thing here Winking

On v2, you also posted about how Nadal's family have been so athletic and how it could mean he is genetically at an advantage in this regard in your article 'The Marinovich Product.' I can't remember you really defending that opinion on here smiley

Maybe I am wrong in my observation, but it is more out of surprise than anything, it isn't even a case of debating or arguing- more like putting forward a different view.

by N2D2L Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:14 pm

From 606v2:

legendkillerv2 wrote:I myself like Rafa. He has a vulnerability about him. Yet this is a guy that writes to the ball girls and boys of every Slam to thank them. Rafa for me is a nice guy. Respectful of his fellow players. Yes sometimes his comments can cause controversy, but he is a lovely guy. Whenever me and my nephew have seen him play, he has always granted my nephew an autograph. He does love the fans and always gives them more than enough of his time.

There has been plenty on here clearly opposing your opinion above ^, no? As I said you can both put forward your point of view, and also accept people are entitled to their opinion.

by legendkillar Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:38 am

Julia, I am not sure what point you are trying to make. I have done the Nadal argument to death and have no desire to re-visit that argument. I go by what I have seen and witnessed. Yes Nadal with some of his on court antics needs to adjust his attitude slightly and play within the rules, but I also acknowledge he isn't alone in this with time wasting for example Del Potro, Murray himself and Djokovic have also abused.

Is Nadal an easy target? Yes he is. But can he himself improve the image portrayed to his detractors? Yes he can. Nadal is not the centre focus of my tennis world which is why I choose not to debate about him often.

by N2D2L Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:21 am

legendkillar wrote:Julia, I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

No it's not about Nadal specifically.
Maybe I'm not being clear enough. Basically you argue certain things on 606v2, which are relatively balanced, and on this forum you selectively choose to talk about the things which will make you more popular on here.
If you think Nadal is a 'lovely guy' (as you said on v2), and have no reply to constant degradation here, is that not suspicious? It's like somehow your opinions change when you post on here compared to v2.

by Tenez Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:21 am

I don't buy the niceties done by top players. Their marketing values largely outweigh the deeds. Telling us Rafa is a nice guy cause he sends a word to the ball girls and boy is nice but this is typically a no cost, no sweat PR move.

That does not help me get a better understanding of his ability to stay fair and cool under pressure which is what I am ultimately interested in.

Not make his opponent to wait for him would be so much more gracious and appreciated by those who really care.

by Tenez Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:24 am

legendkillar wrote:Just read that Nadal made 2 FH and 2 BH winners all match against Djokovic. So you can see why it is viewed as a crushing despite the scoreline.

Yes some think Nadal has one of the best FH ever.

by legendkillar Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:31 am

Julia Santamaria wrote:
legendkillar wrote:Julia, I am not sure what point you are trying to make.
No it's not about Nadal specifically.
Maybe I'm not being clear enough. Basically you argue certain things on 606v2, which are relatively balanced, and on this forum you selectively choose to talk about the things which will make you more popular on here.
If you think Nadal is a 'lovely guy' (as you said on v2), and have no reply to constant degradation here, is that not suspicious? It's like somehow your opinions change when you post on here compared to v2.

My opinions haven't changed. I don't want rehash old arguments. If people wish to disrespect Nadal, fine. As I said people are entitled to their opinions. I am not going to argue every point someone makes about Nadal in a negative light. As I said he isn't the centre of my tennis world

by Tenez Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:36 am

FedererKing wrote:See the reason I don't think Nadal is a prolific doper is because he isn't that stupid. It's possible he HAS done it, along with a lot of others, but what guy is going to risk public humiliation and the removal of all his awards by continuing to dope...? He certainly wouldn't dope all year round that would be suicide. It's just very far fetched in my view for doping to be that prolific. The main reason he is successful is because this is the "Nadal era" of tennis... boring 1 dimensional surfaces and conditions, and the sooner we are out of "nadal era" the better.

The funny thing is, Federer has outdone Nadal in Nadal-era.

Nadal is also a liar and very dishonest. He may claim he doesn't go to the gym much but it's a lie. You only have to look at his antics on court with all those tics to realize his head is right the way up his Spanish arse. I have very good reasons for disliking the lout, but I have to disagree with the doping theory... it doesn't stack up. I'd feel more confident about it if I knew he was honest on court and with the rules... but he isn't.

His physical tennis does not amaze you?

With guys like Nadal or Armstrong there is no risk. Everything is sealed and nothing is left to chance. LA would have never been caught while his contracts were bringing millions to all his sponsors. Even governments protect them as they are nation's hero's . I suspect they even know when they are going to be tested and can actually influence the number of testing. I am sure you are aware for instance that the number of out of competition testing dropped during nadal time while typically it increased in all other sports.

When you have a game purely based on physique, nothing wchich can improve that physique is left to chance.

by N2D2L Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:51 pm

legendkillar wrote:My opinions haven't changed. I don't want rehash old arguments. If people wish to disrespect Nadal, fine. As I said people are entitled to their opinions. I am not going to argue every point someone makes about Nadal in a negative light. As I said he isn't the centre of my tennis world

You are missing my point here, perhaps this is my fault as I haven't explained myself well enough.
What I'm trying to say is that you selectively choose your opinions which you know many here share, and then only post those on this forum. Your points of view which is not with the 'party line' on here (ie thinking Rafa is a 'lovely guy') would not be posted by you, well I haven't seen anything like it on this forum.
It's not like Nadal or anyone else is the centre of your tennis world or not, coincidentally your first post on here yesterday was a stat about Nadal.

by Daniel Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:13 pm

Tenez wrote:
legendkillar wrote:Just read that Nadal made 2 FH and 2 BH winners all match against Djokovic. So you can see why it is viewed as a crushing despite the scoreline.
Yes some think Nadal has one of the best FH ever.

Nadal generally doesn't get many winners at all. He sits 5 miles behind the baseline and waits for mistakes that eventually come (unless prime Federer or Djokovic or Del Potro). It really is ridiculous how far behind the baseline he is able to get in modern conditions.

by N2D2L Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:17 pm

FK, do you know who got the most forehand winners in the USO 2013?

by Tenez Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:53 pm

FedererKing wrote:
Tenez wrote:
legendkillar wrote:Just read that Nadal made 2 FH and 2 BH winners all match against Djokovic. So you can see why it is viewed as a crushing despite the scoreline.
Yes some think Nadal has one of the best FH ever.
Nadal generally doesn't get many winners at all. He sits 5 miles behind the baseline and waits for mistakes that eventually come (unless prime Federer or Djokovic or Del Potro). It really is ridiculous how far behind the baseline he is able to get in modern conditions.

The bizarre thing about it is that when he hits a winner they are with so much margins that they look really easy. To create the same pace Federer (and all other players) needs to hit flatter and much closer to net and lines taking much more risk. On wonders why Nadal is not hitting more winners straight away? The reason is simple....he does not have that basic talent and this is the reason he stands far back. He cannot time a fast ball as well as other players. And This is also why Djoko breaks him so easily by sending returns to his feet.

It all makes sense...but an amazing athlete for sure!

by noleisthebest Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:01 pm

The more time goes on, the more I would love to see a Fed Nadal exo in Wimbledon, wooden racquets, real grass, plenty of Pimms and sunshine.

Only then would JS maybe understand what a FH winner is.

Why does not somebody organise it?
Come on Mr Branson, you can do it! strawberries

by Tenez Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:10 pm

I think that will never happen unfortunately....well the Pimms yes, the sunshine maybe, the wooden racquet Never.....though I am sure there is a market for that. There was one for the kind of surfaces ....but that was really stupid while the wooden racquet would be a good one. I think it should be played on grass......and .....on clay.

by Sponsored content

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31