many people are attributing nadal's loss yesterday to the tight and gruelling schedule he's been through for the past 6 months winning so many titles. That's a very valid point.
BUT....
If Nadal's tired with top level efforts in 6 months; can he hold off this form for 4-5 years. Remember, that was what Federer has achieved and managed to do. He kept playing all those tournaments, at least reaching the finals (more often than not, successfully defending them..). So effectively he had to play almost every other week continuously for 4-5 successive years.
I guess everybody appreciates that this is the sign of greatness. Nadal will be in that league if he can remain fit and in rhythm for 4-5 successive years, which is very difficult for power players like him. I bet he's gonna find it very difficult when it's his turn to go through the testing phase of his career; as such players look very attractive when in form; and equally silly when out of form.
Nevertheless, my best wishes for Nadal to match Federer for his achievements. And also to Federer to continue for few more years at top gear. Want to see more finals like Wimbledon '08
Re: nadal's loss.......
by Varun ccs on Sep 08, 2008 04:34 PM
There are subtle differences between getting "tired with top level efforts in 6 months" and "holding off this form for 4-5 years." You know, there is something called "burnout". Please read more about it to understand. To hold form for 4-5 years or more, players reduce the number of tournaments to focus on. It's obvious from stats that Nadal has been playing continuously in the past eight months and more and has now played more than 25% more matches at the top level than any other top men's player on the circuit during this time. Even then he managed to get to the semis which is an improvement in his performances in US Open (just recall how nadal improved upon his performances in Wimbledon before taming Federer). Even Federed admits reaching semis of all four grand slams in a year is like job well done. I would say ppl should not be too worried about Nadal. If he can take care of Federer on Grass, he can take care of himself and the rankings will follow. Just enjoy Tennis and the competition.
Re: nadal's loss.......
by VASUDEVAN V on Sep 08, 2008 04:40 PM
Dear Ravindra: It is in the style of game that Nadal and Federer adopt. Nadal is a highly muscular and physical player, bustling around the court. He exerts himself a lot on the court. He loses much more energy than Federer. Federer, at his best (even when not at his best, one cay say), is a smooth mover on the court, seldom breaking a sweat. Hence, he uses much less energy than Nadal. Nadal is tired because of his exertions on the court this year, especially on clay courts which is highly enervating. This is why one feels that Nadal is more prone to injuries and may find it difficult to dominate for a longer period. But, then he is only 22 and at this point of time physically very strong. May be he will prove me wrong!
Re: nadal's loss.......
by bango tango on Sep 08, 2008 09:28 PM
Vasudevan , its not clay ; rather Deco Turf II which takes a severe toll on physical players like Nadal...
Generally there is a 4 to 5 year reign at the top after which the downslide begins and others begin to overtake... In case of Federer, it might be longer than5 years cos he is a genius..
1976 to 1980 - Borg Dominance 1980 to 1984 - McEnroe dominance 1985 to 1988 - Lendl/Wilander dominance 1988 to 1992 - Edberg/Becker?Courier dominance 1993 to 1999 - Agassi/Sampras dominance 2000 to 2003 - Hewitt/Safin/Sampras/Agassi 2004 to 2008 - Federer/Nadal
I expect Fedex and Nadal to dominate for a few more years!!
Re: Every great player has a 5 year reign at the top!!
by Amit Kulkarni on Sep 08, 2008 02:40 PM
From 2004 to 2007, Federer has dominated. Nadal has just started this year. Time is yet to come where one can say Nadal is dominating. But this sure has been a great year for him and seems like he'll be the one for next few years. Fedex has left his prime behind. His glow will go dim slowly...
Re: Every great player has a 5 year reign at the top!!
by jeetu on Sep 08, 2008 03:51 PM
no way... nadal no way near federer and fedex is gonna come back today.... nadal is only 2008 and dis is not called dominance.. only 2 glad slam out of four its 50 %.. at least win 3 to say he dominated..
Re: Every great player has a 5 year reign at the top!!
by Madhusudhan N.R. on Sep 08, 2008 06:37 PM
Nadal has just started and has a long, long way to go before you can compare him with Federer.
You were so confident about victory of Djokovic and Nadal according to your mathematics. Why your mathematics fails every time? 1.India won the ODI series. 2.Dhoni was best scorer against Mendis. 3.Federer won 4.Murray won
Re: aishwarya patil
by Anurag Rathore on Sep 08, 2008 02:15 PM
Aish. Ranking doesn't matter. Who is best can only be decided by form class. After having more rest this year, now Federer has form with class also. Nadal doesn't have the class like Federer. When he will be out of form he will struggle more. An out of form Federer has reached in 3 finals and 1 semi because of his class. Probably he will win the US Open also.
Re: aishwarya patil
by ranya sudhakar ravindra on Sep 08, 2008 02:54 PM
rightly said anurag, it would be interesting to see whether Nadal can cross Quarters of major tournaments, when he is past his prime; which fedex is managing to do despite very poor form.
Re: aishwarya patil
by VASUDEVAN V on Sep 08, 2008 02:17 PM
Mam, may be you are right about the points. But, remember it is difficult to defend points than earn them. Over the last four years Federer was defending his points with ease, while Nadal, Djokivic were all earning them with great difficulty. The reason why Federer has lost his first spot is because he lost in the Semis at Australian Open and the finals of Wimbledon. He lost heavy points by these losses. He defended his points at French Open, as he continued to be the finalist. The real merit of Nadal will be known in 2009 French Open onwards, when he has to defend lot of points. Federer can earn points if he goes beyond Semis at Australian Open and win at French, Wimbledone etc. because in spite of a bad year, he is still a finalist in three of the four Slams! That is why you find even a one time Slam finalist or semi-finalist leap ahead in the rankings and then fall from grace when he is unable to defend the points. Let us see what Nadal does in 2009 to defend his points. Federer did it successfully for four long years!
Re: aishwarya patil
by VASUDEVAN V on Sep 08, 2008 05:01 PM
Varun Dude, Nadal will not earn any points by winning French and Wimbledon next year, as he will only be defending his points as the winner this year. Hence, Federer stands to gain. You appear to have commented for commenting sake and not with any analytical idea!What I have written is only to highlight the difference between defending and winning points in the ranking system now in vogue and all these four years Federer has merely been defending most of the time. Now, the tide has changed. Federer has to earn and Nadal has to defend for the no.1 spot. This makes a lot of difference dude!
Re: aishwarya patil
by Varun ccs on Sep 09, 2008 06:23 AM
Maybe you didn't the analytical idea in the post. Not my fault. Defending doesn't mean he gets 0 points. Defending means he gets to keep as many points as he got last time !!! It's not that Nadal will not earn any points by winning French and Wimbledon next year. It's just that he doesn't add to the points which are showing right now in his a/c. But even in this case Federer won't be in a position to overtake Nadal (not considering Aus Open 2009 here). Of course Aus Open 2009 also has an effect in the rankings. "Don't earn" is used in a relative sense which means they don't add to their existing points. This is what I understand. There is no magic in the sense that except Nadal everyone else is goin to earn points in wimbledon and French. That would be being too partial to the champion.
Re: aishwarya patil
by SimplyStraightforward on Sep 08, 2008 08:20 PM
Thanks Vasudevan. I was in a confusion all these days on waht basis these rankings are decided. ITs clear to me now.
Re: aishwarya patil
by Bhasmasur on Sep 08, 2008 02:22 PM
Idiot, Are you comparing a man who has won 12 grand slam titles to some yuppie like Murray?? Don't talk like an idiot!!
Federer has atleast 3/4 years of top flight tennis left in him and i'am sure he will reach 20 Grand slam titles.....and he will create a record that no one will ever break : 1) Number of grand slam titles 2) Only man to win all 4 grand slams(besides Agassi) 3) Only man to have won 5 consectuive US open crowns
Plus many more records...he is the greatest...think before you speak, you foolish girl!!
Re: aishwarya patil
by Calspadeaspade on Sep 09, 2008 02:24 AM
So what? Thre is a ist time for everyhing. when Marat Safine bea Pete Sampras how many titles did Marat win? The same story could be true now.Murray may surprise every one.
Re: aishwarya patil
by Varun ccs on Sep 09, 2008 11:35 AM
Are u very sure Mr Bhasmasur that Federer could be - Only man to win all 4 grand slams(besides Agassi)
Re: aishwarya patil
by Anurag Rathore on Sep 08, 2008 01:53 PM
Hi Aishwarya. I predicted Federer vs Murray two days ago. Your prediction Djokovic vs Nadal was wrong. Why you believe in ranking? In Tennis you go with ranking but in Cricket Dhoni is number 1 in ICC ranking, you don't accept. Why? Federer has got enough rest this year. Next year will be too tough for Nadal. I think soon he will loose his number 1 position.
Re: aishwarya patil
by kareem on Sep 08, 2008 06:24 PM
That means you also accept Dhoni is number 1 ! yeah exactly only one question remaining who is better .. brodman or dhoni??i belive dhoni is far better than brodman.. same her nadal is far better than federer
i have been watching tennis for a long time.i have watched brog magic mac tan trums conner abuses ivanovic serves beckers athletics and all the only person i could compare fed would be either borg or pete. But comparing greats like these is totally unfair because they became great as they are unique and have a style of thir own and cannot be compared with each other. so let give each player the respect they deserve.
Most of us compare Federer with Rod laver, Borg, Sampras etc. for the tag of Worlds greatest ever Tennis player. pls consider the following ROD LAVER - Did he have an opposition like Nadal, Jokovich, Roddick, for that matter even Murray now with 21 aces & 60 plus winners in a single match against a world No. 1 whose best year is 2008. BORG - Won many French & Wimbledons. All know he is not good on hard courts. How many times did he make it to the hard court finals against what kind of opposition. SAMPRAS - How many French open finals did he make. Where as Federer whom every one know is not good on clay as he is on others had made it to two finals including one in his worst year after becoming no.1 and not to forget that 2007 French open was a Five set final which could have gone anyway as well as this years Wimbledon which was again a five setter. NADAL - No doubt he is one of the best players ever. But none of the erstwhile greats had an opposition like today and to stay on the top for a consecutive 4 years with this kind of opposition speaks volumes of Federer. So pls do not argue on a non issue. RSRSRSRS
Re: Federer the Greatest Ever
by VASUDEVAN V on Sep 08, 2008 02:08 PM
Mr.Sreenu Rao: You are perhaps not aware of the past players. Rod Laver won the Grand Slam in 1962 and then again in 1969 after the open era started. Australia itself had great players like Ken Roswell, Fred Stolle, Roy Emerson, John Newcombe, Tony Roche etc. during Laver's era. besdies several great players from America and Europe. Similarly, Borg had to contend with Connors, McEnroe, Tanner, Geruleitis, Vilas, Panatta, Nastase etc. Sampras had to contend with Becker, Edberg, Courier, Agassi and many others. Every era has its bunch of great players and the great players overcome the best of their era and win. You can only win against the opposition you have and that is what players of every era are doing!
Re: Federer the Greatest Ever
by SREENU RAO on Sep 09, 2008 06:58 AM
Dear Mr. Vasudevan, I did not say that there was no competition. It is all about quality competition. Till today did anyone compare whether Rod Laver or Ken rosewall was the greatest. Whether Borg or Mcenroe is the best. Whether Sampras or Agassi is the best. But we do now saying that Nadal is the greatest tennis player ever. That is quality opposition man. And what about power tennis. What can Rod Laver do if your opposition is serving so many aces at 130 - 150 miles an hour where your racquet also cannot reach. I believe that you forget the joke that in 60's, 70's & 80's the opposite pplayer can smoke a cigarette before the ball comes back to him. Pls consider all facts. And for your kind information I am not a Roger Federer fan. Regards, Sreenu
Re: Federer the Greatest Ever
by SimplyStraightforward on Sep 08, 2008 03:45 PM
absolutely right..There is no single era that is with out competition in professional tennis. It is very unfair to say that somebody was successful becos there was not enough competition at that time
Re: Federer the Greatest Ever
by Calspadeaspade on Sep 09, 2008 02:28 AM
You are very right. But in women's tennis there ws a brief period of vaccuum when Hingis made hay until the William sisters came.
Re: If Federer wins today........
by narmada thampan on Sep 08, 2008 12:55 PM
1 Rafael Nadal ESP 6700 2 Roger Federer SUI 5930 3 Novak Djokovic SRB 5105
Re: If Federer wins today........
by Anurag Rathore on Sep 08, 2008 12:58 PM
How much titles Federer has to win consecutively to regain his number 1 position? Can he become number 1 after winning Australia open next year?
Re: If Federer wins today........
by Varun ccs on Sep 08, 2008 01:03 PM
Even if he wins, Aus Open 2009, it might well depend on what Nadal does in Aus Open 2009.
Re: Is Murray going to beat Federer
by SimplyStraightforward on Sep 08, 2008 04:34 PM
generlly Fedex has Nadal hurdlein finals..He lost only to Nadal in the finals..None other can beat him in the finals. Most of the tournamnts Federer won aianst opponents who beat nadal on thier way. So this time also Federer will win against Murray.
Re: Is Murray going to beat Federer
by Anurag Rathore on Sep 08, 2008 12:22 PM
Murray is fantastic as I posted two days ago "He can beat Nadal". But in final Federer has too much experience of finals and knows how to handle pressure of final. So chances of Murray in final against Federer is 25-30 percent only.
Re: Is Murray going to beat Federer
by narmada thampan on Sep 08, 2008 12:21 PM
am rooting for fedex and i think its gonna be roger again..my pick for roger to win the title still stands firmly.
Re: Re: Is Murray going to beat Federer
by zuber mansoor pathan on Sep 08, 2008 12:18 PM
Federar will definately win, well in between it was the bad time for him, he knows how to win a title , so he will land up with 5th US title.
