Nadal has just reached the deadend of his run in the aussie open. the quaters against andy murray should be his last match in the tourny.... after the defeat he will start to lose in the ranking and straight away become #3 in the world after the australian open.
With the exit of Del Potro, the road to the Final for Nadal has been cleared somewhat. He has to beat Murray though, who seems to have raised his game a notch. If Nadal is in the Final, he is going to lift the Cup.
Re: Del Potro exits
by ranya ravindra on Jan 24, 2010 07:53 PM
forget about all that rafa has no chance of reaching finals with the 2 andy's & cilic in his half of draw
Re: Re: Del Potro exits
by aishwarya patil on Jan 24, 2010 09:31 PM
You are right, the competition is getting tougher by the day, and there is greater depth in the Men's circuit today than it was say 3 years back, but that goes for everyone. Do you feel Federer is going to bulldoze past Davydenko and Djokovic? He may, but you can never be sure. Regarding Nadal, he remains the most feared player on the circuit, despite a slump in his form.
After US open 2009, I thought del potro will be consistent unlike Nadal/murray/djokocic/roddick and will win all the GS from now. These defeats only prove federer's awesome winning streak!! It takes time for those federer haters to understand what a player federer is.
Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer's Greatness
by aishwarya patil on Jan 24, 2010 09:27 PM
No sane person can hate Federer. Not just is he a great champion, he is a nice human being as well. The only point of debate is, whether is the greatest of all time, or at least the greatest of his era. There are some who feel is is not just the greatest of the era, he is the greatest of all time. For me, the debate over the gretest of the era is useless, for he is not yet the (undisputed) greatest of the era (say post-Laver era). One point (and not the only one) which goes against him is his poor record against Nadal, and never mind the surface on which this record has been constructed. Those who blame Clay for Nadal's superior record have to accept that on Clay there is no competition, while on other surfaces, Nadal is able to give Federer a run for his money. And of course the overall record favours Nadal rather overwhelmingly. Though Federer has to surpass more milestones (like Olympic Gold in Singles), I shall accept Federer as the greatest player of his era, if and only if he retires with a positive Head to Head with Nadal and Murray. Hail Federer, the Great Champion, but Nadal is a better player, despite Federer having reached so many GS semi-finals.
Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer's Greatn
by aishwarya patil on Jan 24, 2010 09:35 PM
And BTW, Nadal by no stretch of imagination can claim to be the greatest player of the era. There are some who say he is the greatest of all time on Clay. There are disputes about Federer being the greatest on other surfaces, are there not? There are some who feel that Sampras with that booming serve of his, would have got the better of Federer on Grass. I know he lost to Federer in fourth round at Wimbledon in 2001, but one observation does not establish a law, or does it?
Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer's Gr
by NewsCurious on Jan 25, 2010 09:14 AM
What ever record says, but federer game is more styilsh than Nadal.
Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer's Gr
by NewsCurious on Jan 25, 2010 09:14 AM
But what ever record says, Federrer game is more styilsh than Nadal.
Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer's Gr
by sachin on Jan 25, 2010 03:08 AM
WHO ARE THOSE "SOME".. DOES THESE "SOME " ESTABLISH A LAW???... fedx is the gretest tennis player...he is not ristricted to any surface like sampras on grass... nadal on clay...
Re: Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Federer'
by Sudden Lee on Jan 25, 2010 08:38 AM
You are off your head, buddy! Sampras was restricted to grass? he was the best indoors and carpet player there ever was. And even Rafa has proved that he's no longer meant for just clay. Get ur facts right!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Feder
by Rohith Nigam on Jan 25, 2010 09:14 AM
For a player to be greatest it doesn't means that he should have a better head-to-head record against all the players. It should be like what others have acheived and what Federer has acheived. If you say Rod Laver the greatest then why didn't he could able to win as many grandslam as fed has. why didn't he able to reach as many semis as fed has reached. The one point is no one can have every possible acheivement and by chance if he has then you people will claim that he doesn't had enough competition. Like when fed was winning everything till 2007, you had a point that there was no competition like murray, djoker etc. though they were there at that time also but were unable to win against him, now since they started defeating now you say that fed is not capable of defeating them.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Feder
by sachin on Jan 26, 2010 05:43 AM
HOW MANY FRENCH OPEN HAVE SAMPRAS WON ...OR WHAT WAS HIS PERFORMANCE IN FRENCH OPEN... FEDX HAVE BEEN RUNNER UP THRICE & WON 1 TIME...NADAL PERFORMANCE IS BAD AT US OPEN.......
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I takes brain & Heart to understand Feder
by NewsCurious on Jan 25, 2010 09:16 AM
What ever record says, but federer game is more styilsh than Nadal.
