Wow. A bagel for Nadal.

This is getting interesting.

I almost hope Andy pulls out of Shanghai so we can add some drama.

this is ridiculous. that’s all i can say. i’ve never been a nalbandian fan and i never will be. but this is just ridiculous. nadal going down so easily TWICE??? once, ehh makes sense, but TWICE??? where’s the raging bull??? and federer going down in STRAIGHT sets in his revenge match??? what happened to the fed-express??? what is going on in the tennis world??? i swear to god if roddick or anyone else pulls out to let nalbandian in i will personally track them down and punch them in the face. why?? am i afraid of nalbandian as a threat to federer, nadal, djokovic, and just about everyone else? i’d say i’ve accepted that he would completely own the TMC if he played. the reason it would bother me though is because it’s ridiculous for someone to play amazing 2 tournaments and be the best player in the world. and as of this moment he most certainly is. it’s because everyone is so damn tired and nalbandian has played like 20 matches all year with a .5 record so he’s got plenty of energy. and what’s he doing with that energy? turning the tennis world upside down? why? no matter what the arguements i don’t think nalbandian is even better than nadal. more talented in many ways but not better. i hope nalbandian plays well next year, in the FIRST HALF of the year that is. that way, when he reaches a fresh nadal, djokovic, or federer, they’ll smoke him like the chump he is. yeah i said it, nalbandian’s a chump, always has been and always will be. all he’s doing to win this matches is not miss a single shot. how is that possible? becuz he has energy. i’ve seen nadal play a match with like 2 UE’s. same with djokovic and federer. i no there are plenty of ppl who, for some reason, would love to see nalbandian at the top with these guys, but he doesn’t belong there. he doesn’t have the desire champions have, even safin has shown some desire, that’s why he has 2 slams and 2 finals. what does nalbandian have? 2 masters and a MC becuz of lucky hot streaks he got when everyone else was spent. and paris complains about the top players not playing their masters. who wants to see elite players playing like crap? obviously nalbandian does. i’m done venting for now but i’ll be back, especially when b*tch roddick pulls out of the TMC becuz he knows he has no chance and hes gonna wanna “rest” for davis cup. i hate nalbandian, with a passion.

My, my, what vitriol directed at Nalbandian! Unlike the previous poster, I am a great fan of the Argentine player. He played a great tournament and deserved to win. I hope he gets a chance to play in Shanghai and win. If not he, then I am rooting for Djokovic!

To sensational safin…..When somebody wins tournaments who are not champions all of a sudden people start coming up with excuses.Frankly it doesnt make any sense at all.Nalbandian has always been a great player beating federer 8 times in total.R u saying that it all happened because fed was exhausted? Only nadal has managed to do that against him and that also on clay.
I do agree fed and djok did look exhausted against him but in this match nadal did look fresh.Lets put it this way nadal has always been a chump on hardcourts.He has never won a hardcourt title when ever since fed and djok knew how to play him.He was getting beaten by many players like youzhny berdych,blake,ferrer and even monaco…basically anyone who has 2 balls .All he knows how to do is to grind on slow surfaces which includes wimbledon because the grass is slowing down.Nadal doesnt have any fucking talent other than to run down balls and to use his muscle power to hit the ball hard.Nalby is a highly talented player than much better than nadal will ever be whether he wins slams or not……

whether he wins slams or not… that says it all. there’s always a million excuses to find when someone wins or loses. nadal wasn’t fresh. nadal hasn’t been fresh since wimbledon. and if u watched that wimbledon final u would no how talented nadal really is. this is what nalbandian has driven me to, defending nadal of all ppl! instead of being a fatty who preys on tired players, maybe nalbandian should step his game up when it matters, at the slams and during every other big tournament during the year. thats when everyone else is playing their top games.

Ok, To “sensational safin” and Ryan:
You guys are retarded, you do not like Nalbandian…!Listen, this is a guy who has been able to beat Fed and Nadal twice in straight sets, something nobody else has done, he beat Fed 8 times, and he was always tired? Give me a break, God, I sound like Roger now; this guy is today the best player in the world, why? Because to be the best you have to beat the best and he did it, I don’t care how tired NAdal or Fed were, he played with that desire and hunger that most players lack, he is an inspiration for all of us who struggle at the beginning and finally find our form, don’t be a hater and appreciate the fact that he is around to put these two guys to think about improving…

Oh and I have news….Roddick just called me and said he is pulling out of Shangai, he can not wait to see Nalbandian destroy Federer again…!

i never said federer was always tired. up to this point considering federer had won 8 of the last 9 matches against nalbandian id say he pretty much figured him out. now, twice, nalbandian has beaten a pretty beat federer.

its ok guys, nalbandian was just treeing out of his @$$. look for him to get injured next year and miss the whole season and retire at the end of 2009.

I believe that if Nalbandian continue to play the way he did,he will certainly beat Nadal or Jokovic again and again because they have no weapen agaist the way he is dominating them and the way he is playing now. Federer is something else to beat, because Federer is not only a determination, but also a perfection, and he will find the way and the solution, and will never and what so ever give the slightest chance to Nalbandian to be the world no one. Nalbandian will certainly lose to many other players like Karlovic or else, Not federer. He has more talent and more solutions to beat any kind of player for the next few years at least.

To alexandros……i feel sorry that you have a tough time understanding english….I’ve only praised nalbandian in my post.To sensational safin…Nalbandian might be a fatty but he still plays better tennis than the hyperfit nadal.As for fed being tired he took a lot of time off before the madrid masters and he was not tired at all during the madrid masters event.Nalbandian forced those errors from fed.As for nadal’s wimbledon final fed was playing below par for the first 4 sets and then he raised his game in the 5th set.So it might have looked as if nadal played incredible.And like i said wimbledon is slowing down these days and it only becomes easier for nadal to win there.Credit should be given where it is due.Just because the opposition is tired that doesn’t mean anything.If they are better they are better.SAfin was supposed to be more tired than hewitt in AO final 2005 after that epic match with federer .But still safin won it.That shows that it is possible to win despite fatigue setting in.In today’s case nadal was simply destroyed.He had no answers to nalbandian’s groundstrokes especially his backhand.You say that Nadal hasnt been fresh since wimbledon.Why because he was so close to winning it? If thats the case i think you should give a lot of credit to federer for playing the way he is playing despite losing in that FO 07 final.If you say nadal was physically injured its not an excuse because he plays that way.It’s his choice whether he wants to invite injury or not.I think his injury itself is a fake act.He is always injured when he knows its losing time.Even in the AO open 07 he was coming up with that excuse.I agree Nalbandian could have won slams and that he is an underacheiver for his talent but he should be appreciated for the way he plays.His backhand and returns are topclass and so is his quickness around the court despite being a fatty.He has reached atleast the semifinals of all the slams.Did nadal reach there yet?No….Like i said nadal only knows how to grind like any spaniard does on tour except that he is fitter. Nalby doesnt try some stupid tactics like djok or nadal……calling trainers even when not injured,groaning during points etc.Nadal groans a lot and that is mainly to distract the opponent.Anyway Nalbandian is a really good player and credit should be given the way he thrashed nadal today.

“Nalbandian will certainly lose to many other players like Karlovic or else, Not federer. He has more talent and more solutions to beat any kind of player for the next few years at least.”

is that a typo or something? cuz it doesnt fit with the rest of what u were saying. this is certainly interesting though. nalbandian seems to have ascended into a heavenly level. last time we saw someone play so godly at the end of the year was federer himself, in 2003. he dominated the TMC (including his first and most dominant win over nalbandian) and went on to be the now soon-to-be-GOAT. but nalbandian is different from federer. im not quite sure how to explain it but it was always clear that it was federer’s destiny to be a great champion. nalbandian kinda came outta nowhere at 2002 wimbledon but for some reason no one really pegged him as the future of tennis. players like safin, federer, roddick, ferrero, and hewitt all seemed to have laid out paths for them to follow. obviously federer followed it and went beyond. but nalbandian was never really in that group. hes like a del potro, known for his tremendous talent but not really pegged to be an all time champion. and yet here he is dominating like crazy. and there seems to be a lot of debate now about whod win between an ON federer and ON nalbandian. and tactically speaking mostly, i say federer. hes the greatest tennis mind ever. thats why he has had so few losses over the years, because he was able to worm his way out of losing even when he was playing bad. but if they’re both on, think about how to match would play out. nalbandian would be crushing his backhand hand into every possible spot of the court. federer would be crushing his forehand into every possible spot. both serves would be very difficult to handle on both sides. nalbandian has been serving incredibly for these last few weeks, federer said it himself. but we’ve all seen how great federer’s serve can really be and how well he can use it to pull himself out of trouble (wimbledon, wimbledon, and again wimbledon). both are good at net but id expect federer to be the more difficult to read because he likes coming in and u never know when he’s gonna do it. nalbandian comes in occassionally and is obviously good at it but it wont be enough to completely throw off federer, plus federer, he’s on of course, will be extremely capable of hitting his untouchable and gravity defying passing shots. both have great footwork but i think federer, remember theyr both on, has more power than nalbandian and if he’s hitting his spots he’ll be able to run nalbandian around more than the opposite happening. finally, when it comes to crunch time, nalbandian has been known to slip up, but federer isnt as tough as ppl think. but i believe if they are both playing well, meaning federer doesnt have to worry about missing every other shot, then federer takes it. 5th set tiebreaker at i guess TMC final or US open, 5-5, nalbandian’s serving for match point, federer slices it up the line, nalbandian smacks a sick crosscourt backhand, federer barely reaches it but manages to hit a short crosscourt slice, nalbandian responds with a wicked crosscourt angle from the backhand and comes into net, federer on the dead run flicks his wrist and hits a crosscourt backhand pass that magically goes right by nalbandian and lands inside the line. 6-5 match point federer’s serve. fault. second serve to nalbandian’s backhand. he crushes it down the line, federer barely hits a running forehand crosscourt, nalbandian gets there in no time and smacks a forehand up the line, comes into net thinking just in case he needs to put it away, and another flick of the wrist from federer, this time up the line, goes right by nalbandian. federer wins. of course ur gonna say what r the chances and blah blah blah. but remember, this is when theyr both on, and when fed’s on, he’s magic, not magical, just pure magic.

sensational safin, dude, Federer has been displaying such results for many years now, he won basel last week, and now if he loses u say hes tired, I thought u said nalby had no fitness, then an unfit nalby is better than a tired federer, whenever fed loses u have to come up with some excuses. And to stick it to u at least nalby doesnt have half as bad an attitude as safin is showing these days. Nalbandian is as talented as federer, and obviously much more talented than nadal, nadal himself should say “Im nalby’s bitch”.nalbys the king fed and nadal are the used to wipe the floor.

i knew it i knew it..madrid was not a fluke..nalbandian is in devastating form. and hey..none of us should try and make excuses for nadal..he was playing some great tennis, some of those angles he created were just “dope”..but my oh my, david was always there to make the winning shot. i’m gonna take a bow to david..FULL RESPECT ! the way he’s playing rightnow, only a Federer at his best can beat him, and i havent seen that Fed in a while !

How can someone (Nalbandian) who has been so terrible all year long, suddenly start beating the crap (repeatedly) out of the top 2-3 players in the world over the last three weeks??? If he was a youngster just exploding on the tour, I could understand but he is now a middle-age tennis player (almost 26) and, before last month, had won only 5 ATP titles in almost 8 years on the tour. I know he had beaten Federer many times before, had been # 3 in the world, was in the Wimbledon final in 2002 and even won Shanghai in 2005, but he was not even in the top 20 before the Madrid event last month. Honestly, I am totally surprised (even confused)! I have been watching tennis for over 30 years and have never seen anything like this. Unfortunately, he still doesn’t qualify for the Masters. Now, regardless of whoever wins Shanghai, that winner will not be considered the real/current world champion. Right now, it’s Nalbandian. That’s why I think the ATP should do anything it can to allow Nalbandian to play at the Masters; otherwise, whoever wins Shanghai (even if it turns out to be Federer) will be a joke!

“i knew it i knew it..madrid was not a fluke..nalbandian is in devastating form.”

It can’t be a fluke if you neat the No 3, No 2, and No 1 back to back in the same tournament. If you back up those results in the next tournament, that confirms it.

What IS possible, though unlikely, is that Djoko, Fed, and Nadal all participated in match fixing and were paid accordingly to lose to Nalby.

Nalbandian has been a sporatically brillant player since he went pro - he’s always been problematic for other tennis players because of this unpredictability. He’s now in better physical shape than he’s ever been and it shows. Personally, I love to see players who can challenge the best - it makes the game exciting. I used to stop watching when Federer was in the final because the outcome was so predictable. Now with Nalbandian, Djok., and Nadal, there is a least a possibility of a good match. Federer needs to stop taking his winning ways for granted. And it’s about time.

sensationalsafin, you’re way off! On the other hand, I absolutely agree with Ryan’s post dated November 4th, 2007 at 4:05 pm. That says it all! Tired opponents or not - Nalby played absolutely superb tennis in Paris & Madrid!

Let’s just wait if Andy shows in Shanghai or not - and then we can see IF an “out-of-shape” Fed and co. can beat the Argentine when he’s on…

i was hoping for rafa - he played so well against baggy - and it was surprising the way rafa lost, with that bagel (!) in the second set.

but it’s by no means ridiculous. nalbandian has won the MC on indoor hard and does well on indoor carpet. the dude is also clearly “in the zone.” i repeat: if he had not blown his match point against Ferrer at the US Open this year, who knows how far he could have gone? He would have played Nadal next, who he can clearly beat, and then, who? Djokovic? If he had made it to the final against Federer, perhaps the King wouldn’t have 4 crowns? i think it’d be great if Nalbandian went to china and it’s possible if Roddick pulls out to prep for Davis Cup. This is exactly how tennis should be: unpredictable and exciting; change is good.

congrats to nalbandian (fat and middle-aged or not) for rising, phoenix-like, from the ashes; we’ll see, however, how long the resurrection lasts.

i gotta admit, u guys are right about the whole tired thing. it is a bad excuse. it doesnt change the fact that federer is not at his best. so u cant say a top federer lost to a top nalbandian, an mediocre federer lost to a top nalbandian. i think the main reason is motivation.

Perhaps just like the rest of the Argentines, he too is “doping,” - lol!

that would just be uncool

What David Nalbandian has achieved in the last three weeks goes beyond the ordinary. It transcends excuses on the part of the opposition. To beat the top 3 players in the world back to back - when each had already taken out respectable in form players - then take out the top 2 so convincingly within the next 12 days is rock solid evidence that, as he showed at the end of 2005 and in the first half of 2006 at the Oz and French opens, he is one of the true elite. I am new to this forum and its clear there are many serious fans of various players and most are pretty well informed….whether DN plays next week or not as days pass what he has just done will surely sink in to all regular commentators. I don’t think you can overestimate the psychological impact/damage it will have had on both Federer (whom he dominated as a junior which is relevant,) and perhaps even more Nadal who had never met DN until he was beaten last month. I’m sure Nalbandian will beat them both again, perhaps Fed will beat him again but given Federer is already a legend DN will always enter the encounters with everything to gain whereas Fed may well be defending his ranking at the top - quite seriously. I think DN must be aware he has been inconsistent over the years but no more so than he is aware of his injuries and that, crucially, judging on his form up until it kicked in against Fed, the French Open of 2006 would probably have been his. His path to the Wimbledon final 5 years ago was no fluke either. I actually agree with Safin’s fan that somehow DN wasn’t talked about in the same way as others challenging for the top spots. Perhaps commentators knew along with his natural talent his commitment was questionable in a small way. I mean, to get in the world’s top 50 you have to be massively commited so we are talking tiny percentages regarding effort here and there being the difference between tournament winners and semi finalists BUT, I wouldn’t be surprised if this time, if he remains injury free, David Nalbandian stays in the world’s top three throughout next season and takes one or two slams. In his head he must realize only he is stopping himself in the prime of his career. They don’t last long do they?

On the last two threads, we’ve all harped on Nalbandian’s inconsistency. Yes, he’s playing out of his mind but.

On reflection, I think it may be - may be - that we’ve all got it wrong. This is a different Nalbandian to the former world number 3, to the player who really had Roddick beaten in US Open semifinal, who beat Fed in Shanghai, who had Baggy beaten in Aussie Open semi but somehow fluffed it, and so on. That is to say, Nalbandian has been “on” many times before. But this is altogether a new, and superior, “on”. We’re witnessing, perhaps, the maturation of a (mentally) late developer.

In August, he got a new coach. We can see with our own eyes what he feels the coach has done for him in his celebrations following Madrid and Paris. Three things seem to be new. A now formidable serve, which has surprised Federer. A startling new aggression - once content (and able) to rally endlessly, now he is always on the lookout to end the point as soon as possible. His forehand is now very, very good, and his backhand a weapon to rival Fed’s great forehand. This bodes well for g/slams, since he has tended to get trapped in endless five setters, and whilst he has phenomenal stamina, it gets to him in the end. The coach must have said: enough of this nonsense and boy, has Nalbie followed instructions.

The third thing follows from the others - he has gained confidence which won’t easily be lost. Providing he sticks with coach, he’s going to be a formidable presence in slams next year. All of them. In particular, Nadal is under threat at RG. Remember, conditions in Paris were, in Greg “the teeth” Rusedski’s words, “ridiculously slow” - ideal for Nadal, although lacking high bounce of course. Incidentally, I said how puzzled Fed sometimes looks when playing Nalbandian - Nadal was looking bewildered. I’ve never seen him taken apart like that and, in a backhanded sort of way, it shows how good Federer is; in Paris, he very nearly came back, in second set, against the extraordinary Nalbandian.

2008 looks exciting. At last Federer has a rival who threatens to eclipse him, and his response is going to be very interesting indeed. I wouldn’t for one moment rule him out. And meanwhile can we please, please, have no more about Sampras’ competition being tougher than Fed’s? Fed, of course, may win nothing more - that’s a possibility if a remote one. But say he wins another 5 slams - look at the competition: Nalbandian, Nadal, Djokovic, Gasquet, Murray - come on, these people would eat Sampras’ rivals alive.

But of course, Fed has still got to do it……..

Sensationalsafin - so you hate Nalbandian with a passion? I’ll tell you what I hate with a passion: bloody Textspeak. Why for God’s sake can’t you write proper English?

cuz im too damn lazy. this is the internet, home of textspeak. i understand ur frustration, when i reread some of my own posts i cant tell when i end thoughts and sentences, but idc. grendel u make a very good point. not only is this a totally new nalbandian but this is also a completely new twist that tennis has never really seen before. but can nalbandian really keep it up? federer was in the zone last year around this time too, and he dominated at the AO this year, then look what happened. he’s gradually slipping. gradually, not completely, but slowly he’s losing his chokehold on the tennis world. even gonzalez had his peak, whether it was small compared to federer’s and now nalbandian’s, he still played amazing during this time last year and it carried him through the AO and then look what happened to him. the thing about tennis and about david nalbandian in particular is there’s no way of predicting the future. for all we know nalbandian will win the golden slam next year. or he might reach the AO final, lose to federer, and then fail to pass the quarters of any other slam. he’s playing divine tennis. nadal’s no slouch when it comes to figuring his opponents out, he’s a very good thinker. usually overlooked imo but i think nadal is a smart player, especially when he’s playing well. that further proves how amazing nalbandian is right now. please, i think everyone should agree that nalbandian is playing at 100% in every part of the game. if not 100% then 99%. he’s not missing, he’s hitting aces, he could probably hit a winner with his pinky toes at this point. but i still think if you take federer’s 99%-100%, it’ll be better than nalbandian’s. u gotta think that the only reason federer failed to come back in the second set was because nalbandian is playing so great, if it was anyone else federer probably would’ve pulled through. i said this after the TMC in 2005, nalbandian has the ability to negate federer’s magic. and that’s what he’s done in these last 2 matches, negated the magic that would’ve worked on anyone else in the world. i no ive made it pretty clear i despise nalbandian, but i do respect what he’s done. and as much as i hate him he’s done what every tennis player pretty much aims for, perfected tennis. but, as le mort d
arthur teaches us, perfection can’t last.

David play good but am tired this late in year, no? He tree bad and I get him next time.

Mamma mia, necesito mas pantalones cortos.

Nalbandian is the king…that is all I have to say!Please, no more hate or despise, respect and admire instead…

Question:
How does Roger Federer lose ranking points if this week he played in the French masters, whereas last year he didn’t play in the French masters. Wouldn’t he gain points, at least for the 1 match that he won?

I checked his point total from last week to this week and he lost about 700 points. it doesn’t make sense to me, please help.

G’day Nick,

The answer to your question is that all ranking points awarded from last years masters cup have been taken off the 8 players who competed in it, coz now there’s a new top 8, so yeah, Federer won it last year which got him 700 points, but don’t worry, he’ll gain all those 700 points back after the completion of this years masters cup, unless of course Roddick pulls out and lets Nalbandian in there.
But yeah, you’ll notice that not only Federer, but also Nadal, Davydenko, Ljubicic, Roddick, Robredo, Nalbandian, and Blake have all had their points from last year taken off also.

Good answer?

I think Roger Federer has a long term vision, I’ve never seen him play like when he played during the first year of his rise. Now, he never plays like there is no tomorrow anymore, he used to be like that in the past and that’s why he looked so invincible. Nalbandian, Nadal, and other players play like there is no tomorrow because they still want to prove themselves with Federer. Federer does this for a reason, he is a smart man, he wants to exist until 30 - 32 years old, he will not force his body to play to the death, so when he faces someone who is desperately willing to die in a game then he would just play his tennis without trying to give what the opponent actually does to the game. Federer knows he has nothing to prove anymore.

the maximum points to be earned at the masters cup are 750, not 700.

Fed needs to win this one to avoid the risk of losing the number 1 ranking early next year.

2008 is the crunch year for him. He needs to push it one last time this year. If he wins 3 slams again (hopefully including the french) and the oltmpic gold medal - then he is done, immortal for a very very long time. Even if he just wins the french and the gold medal, he would have done that. Wimbledon is obviously his to lose.

Australian would be a tough one, since it is a slower hard court.

I know Federer will win Shanghai, but if someone can just beat him in the round robin stage, then he’ll get 250 points for winning instead of 750 like he did last year. A much preferable outcome wouldn’t you agree?

P.s. Do the tennis world a favour and please pull out Roddick

Is that really right, Tom? That means, in effect, Fed gets 500 points for winning round robin, and only an extra 250 for winning final. What an incredibly silly scoring system. b.t.w., of course we all want Nalbandian to play, but not at the expense of Roddick who, whatever you think of his game, can be a real threat and therefore adds to the excitement. It would be nice if poor old Davydenko went, he’s not going to endanger anyone, I’m afraid. But he won’t. ST4R5: surely Fed wants to win? I think he took his foot of accelerator against Bremmer(?) in Basle - and nearly paid the price. But I don’t think against Nalbandian - who looked surprisingly relaxed for a man “desperately willing to die”.

Nalbandian on whether his current level of play could take him to number 1:

“To be the number one I would have to play like this the whole season,” he said. “It’s not easy to play that well on clay, hardcourts, grass and indoors. I think the only player who can do that at the moment is Roger (Federer).”

Diplomatic? Or the comment of a realist who has serious long term intentions and understands this involves serious work?

100 points for each round robin win (total 300), 200 for the semi win, and 250 for the final win. so even if fed loses one round robin and wins the masters, he still gets 650 points.

thats how it works.

the 4 masters titles he has won so far - he has never lost a match.

I am a Rafa fan and that loss was a hard one to take. Sean’s title did not help much either!

I agree that Nalby has peaked at a time that everybody else is tired or injured. However, this success is not just the result of the rest being tired. Nalby was always a good player. I guess he was not disciplined enough. Now he has a new coach and has lost weight and is motivated. When someone beats the world No 1 and 2 twice in 3 weeks, it can’t be just accident.

That was a terrible loss for Rafa, but Nalby played great. I don’t know who could stop him. I think in the second set Rafa was mentally tired. could not find a solution. But this will make him a better player, because now he has a challenge.that’s how Federer became Federer and I believe Rafa will become a better player as a result of these defeats.

with Djoker, Nalby and Murray, 2008 will be very interesting.

Regarding an earlier thought that DN is some way into his career at 25 to turn it around at Slams - Lendl was 24 when he won the French for the first time and look at the multitude of near misses at majors he’d already had at that point before collecting all but the one designed for animals. (He was incredibly disciplined of course, perhaps impossible for any player to have been more so.) I think DN will win at least a couple. On a different topic altogether - are you supposed to do this or start another discussion elsewhere altogether, I don’t know so sorry if I’m hijacking the direction - but I would say Lendl’s achievments over the course of his entire career are in fact the greatest of any player in the open era, despite not winning Wimbledon. To have been at the top or very very close to it for 14 seasons out of 15…to have winning head to heads against so many legends - I know Connors was getting older - but Mac, Becker, Wilander etc. An absolutely astonishing achievment - 94 singles titles (well over 100 if you include those not on the official ATP circuit like Beckenham - on grass funnily enough - beat Cash in 91 didn’t he!?) - not as naturally talented as Fed but a longevity record Rog may well be aspiring to - to bring us back to an earlier comment in the discussion I’ve deviated from.

so most people are predicting greatness from nalbandian, atleast for next year. and federer is of course bound to struggle next year with so many challengers. what would happen if they meet in the quarters at the AO and nalbandian does his usually dominating over federer, goes up 2 sets, then loses 7-5 in the fifth? wouldnt that be ideal. haha

sensational safin;I dont read your posts cos its too annoying to rd wht ur syn ;gives mebrainfreeze and makes my jaws lock.
I think Roger will now go away and figure out what the hell happened and fight back.In the second set he began to figure out how to play Nalbandian.He almost made it to a third set.In a 5 setter like Aussie open he will have time to work out a strategy.Looking forward to seeing that.Roger will simply take it on as the next challenge.

Fed is 64-8 this year so far - not the lofty 92-5 of last year, but still a phenomenal year, considering he won 3 majors.

At his PEAK, sampras would lose 14-15 matches a year, plus he never won 3 majors in one year, fed has done that THRICE.

So put that in perspective. Fed’s 2007 is still better than Sampras’s best year ever. And this is Fed’s 3rd or 4th best year, based on how you see it. That’s something.

Great discussion. A few words.

Regarding Shanghai, keep in mind that as the No. 9 ranked player David Nalbandian does get the invite to attend, and fill in should someone drop out at the event. Of course he could get directly in if someone (Nikolay Davydenko/Andy Roddick) withdrew before the groupings get made, which I think get done this weekend (just guessing).

That said, I can’t imagine Davydenko will withdraw, after all he is known for playing every week possible, so why skip a lucrative event like Shanghai. On the other hand, Roddick is a different story. He’s been clear that his focus is on winning the Davis Cup final. Will playing Shanghai help or hurt those chances. Only he knows. My guess is he’ll make the trip.

So if both Davydenko and Roddick attend, will David, a former champion remember, still want to go all that way to essentially be a bench warmer and pick up some green?

Back to Nalbandian’s run of late. Lots of talk that Federer/Nadal were fatigued or tired and thus David won. I don’t buy any of that. As someone above correctly pointed out, if anyone should have been fatigued it should have been Nalbandian! In Paris, Rafa (and Fed) even had a bye while David needed to play an extra match to reach the final.

So if you argument is that your guy Nadal or your guy Fed was tired and that’s why David ripped ‘em, then that’s wishful thankful and you better hope your guy doesn’t meet the New David (Grendel, maybe this is a new level to David’s play) in Australia. Face facts, Nalbandian took a flame thrower to both Federer and Nadal, and really to the entire circuit the last few weeks for that matter.

If you want to argue Fed and Nadal played like crap, that I can see, however I think a lot of that had to do with David. Fed did make a lot of errors against David in both losses, while I thought Rafa looked completely lost yesterday (I never saw the Madrid SF).

As 2008, with the season now over will David spend the two month off season hitting the gym or hitting the buffet?

Berdych actually was up at set and two breaks on Nalby in Madrid.

That match turnaround could prove to be one of the most significant in tennis history if Nalbandian keeps his current form in 2008.

And Fed did have more reason to be tired than Nalbandian. Fed played five matches in six days at Madrid, five matches in seven days at Basel and four matches in five days at Paris.

Nalby conveniently tanked his first-round match the week before, giving him plenty of rest before the start of Paris.

joanna ur definetly overreacting about my typing. i dont fuse words and shorten every possibly word. just the simple and easy ones. and i dont use caps. the way nalbandian is playing now he could go a whole year without losing a match. but thats impossible. he’s not gonna maintain this godly form. that doesn’t mean he’s not gonna play great and be a constant threat but perfection can’t be maintained.

just a thought…

if you plan to write a long posting, aesthically is it much easeir to read if you break your blog into mini paragraphs. staring at 3 inch high chunks of solid copy is a bit daunting.

One can analyze every match to death - tired, injured, illness, speed of court - there is every excuse available. sometimes you have to sit back and say ‘the better player’ won. (match fixing aside)

I’m a federer fan and despite him having a ‘lesser’ year in the eyes of journalists/statstiticians, he’s still the most consistent player on tour.

even so, when he came up against an on-fire canas earlier this year, and an on-fire djokovic in montreal he lost. so now he lost to an on-fire nalbandian. it happens. roger just happens to have been ‘on-fire’ for the past four years!!!

got to give nalbandian credit. he had match point in the US Open semis (the year that Roddick won) and he blew it in 5 sets. the guy has chops; just not as consistent.

i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again: tennis is so much a mental sport and that can cause much more trouble than having an off day with your forehand.

Nalbandian is from the same town I was born…Cordoba (Argentina). So, the local newspapers have reported several times that Nalby could easily be #1 by now if he only would have not spent a lot of time (and money)in his Rally team, attended so many barbeques (even more red wine than meat on the grill)and all those beautiful Argentine women around…But like Nalby always says “tennis is by far not all in life”, he likes to enjoy life to the fullest. Anyways, to make this post short, up until he hired Jaite, he was totally out of shape. He ALWAYS had those groundstrokes but he was also a step too slow.
What is amazing is how easy he can handle a guy like Nadal, who is the ultimate diehard in tennis.
In regards how he can handle Fed (they are now 8:8) I believe that Fed not only gets outplayed but also has the fear (as he has said it himself)to play Nalby, perhaps because he knows about the talent Nalby has. Fed has gone to say that Nalby could become #1 if he decided to do so.
Hopefully Nalby keeps tennis during 2008 as a priority and car racing, too much wine/meat/dating can take a rain check until he decides he had enough being tennis #1.

But in the end they’re 8-8. It’s not 16-0 in nalbandian’s favor. And federer still won 8 of the last 11 matches. It’s not like federer is to nalbandian what roddick is to federer. If nalbandian doesn’t care that much about tennis then why should he be number 1? Players like djokovic, federer, and nadal put everything they have into tennis for a reason. Nalbandian doesn’t deserve to be a top player if he doesn’t feel like putting in the hard workd. Talentwise sure he’s up there but he’s gotta work for it too.

Btw, although it seems like Nalbandian outplays Federer so much, pointwise the matches are unbelievably close. The last 2 matches federer won were last year in Madrid and in Shanghai, both times Federer was dominant and won an overwhelming majority of the points. In Madrid they were tied for points and in Paris Nalbandian only had 4 more points than Federer. In tennis, points tell you how close it really was but the winner is the one who played better on the bigger points. So clearly Federer isn’t as outdone by Nalbandian as, say, Nadal.

Now the real question here is that will nalbandian keep this winning fire from dying.There were many times when nalby’s focus just disappears all of a sudden in a match.He should stop this from happening.If he can then he’ll be dangerous in 2008.Thats the toughest thing to do in tennis.Many critics doubted whether fed has that winning fire like pete use to have to win so many slams but fed has proved them all wrong.

Regarding nalby’s playing style like sensationalsafin pointed out earlier nalby has something in his game that makes fed’s shots look ordinary.I think the issue here is that fed cant really predict where nalby is going to hit that ball especially that backhand.This unpredictability is what makes fed look confused.He used to say that with other guys he can always guess where they are about to go with their shots.But i feel nalbandian is the cleanest ball striker out there and the more the rally goes on the more it is in his favour.Anyway we’ll see what happens the next time they play.

Like st4r5 pointed out fed doesnt try too hard to win these days unless it is for a grandslam.He knows thats all thats left for him to do.He probably doesnt want to spend too much physical and mental energy on matches that are not important for him.So when he feels its too tough to win against an inspired and tough opponent i guess he slightly gives it up especially in the end.

This notion that Nalbandian beats Fed, Nadal and Djoko ’cause he’s fresh and they’re not is definitely a case of reaching little. The guy is 8-8 against Fed. I think that if you’re going to make the argument that Fed was tired every time he played Nalbandian than you’re pretty much out to lunch. By this argument, Fed should lose to just about every guy he faces late in tournaments because they generally don’t play as many mataches as he does and are therefore always fresher than he is. There’s no doubt that like Nadal, Nalbandian does things Fed doesn’t like. And what’s the point of all that gym work and weight lifting if you’e going to be worn out? Fed always looks fresh as daisies to me. It’s that really effortless game he plays, or so everyone keeps telling me.

Whenever some guy has reasonable success against Federer, there seem to be a hundred excuses for it. I’ve got one too:

————————————————-
THIS GUY NALBANDIAN…HE’S PRETTY GOOD!!!
————————————————-

Nalbandian, when focused, is a great shotmaker. And he plays a game very much like Federer. if he had Fed’s serve, perhaps he’d have 6 or 7 majors of his own. This guy is to tennis what Tom Weiskopf was to golf. Tons of talent. Not much density between the ears. I hope he steps up next year. Fed would definitely have competition at every major if he did. Nadal in France, Nalby & Djoko at Wimbledon and the Open, Nadal, Djoko and Nalby at the AO. Might be tough to win 3 slams a year with all those guys on deck.

“Regarding nalby’s playing style like sensationalsafin pointed out earlier nalby has something in his game that makes fed’s shots look ordinary.I think the issue here is that fed cant really predict where nalby is going to hit that ball especially that backhand.This unpredictability is what makes fed look confused.He used to say that with other guys he can always guess where they are about to go with their shots.But i feel nalbandian is the cleanest ball striker out there and the more the rally goes on the more it is in his favour” Ryan.

You’ve put it the best I’ve seen, Ryan, not just on this blog but anywhere. I had a confused idea of what you’re saying, but now it’s clearer in my mind.

Of course, it’s all very well if Fed really is conserving his energies for the grand slams. He still may have to face a revitalised Nalbandian. He has, therefore, to attempt to come to grips with the puzzle. I don’t believe he’ll just give second best, nor rely on Nalbandian having drained his fires.

So how is he going to adapt? That’s the mark of a truly great player, isn’t it, to have the grit and the honesty to admit what he’s got isn’t working - and then to have the ability to do something about it. And not be too proud to ask for help, if nec. I recall Agassi being mortified at being continually unable to beat Hewitt. He specifically hired Cahill to help him turn this around. And it worked.

Only thing is - Fed’s an obstinate fellow…..

Ryan, you were right on the money on why Fed’s shots look ordinary when playing Nalby. Very good point of yours.

What amazes me is how Nalby can handle Nadal. It appears that Nalby’s backhand can handle Nadal’s top spin shots very easy, whereas these shots give Fed’s backhand a lot of trouble.

Too bad Nalbandian did not get that 8th spot for the MC.

Ordinary? Now that’s stretching it. A mediocre Federer definetly, just like against Nadal and sometimes Djokovic. But you gotta be careful when you say “ordinary”. As great as Nalbandian has been playing it’s not like Federer hasn’t hit a spectacular shot here and there. He just doesn’t look godly, like he does against Roddick. Is it really as simple as court coverage? If you think about it that’s what Canas, Djokovic, Nalbandian, Nadal, and even Safin when he’s playing well all have in common more than anything else. It’s not like Davydenko doesn’t have a good two-hander, he lacks the amazing court coverage these guys produced against Federer in their wins. They don’t give him the winners he loves. I wouldn’t call that making his shots look ordinary, just not extraordinary.

well.. Fed’s game always look ordinary everytime he loses a match, be it against Nalby, Nadal, Djok, Canas or Volandri. Its not as Nalby’s game is making him look ordinary. Fed vs Nalby is always closely contested, just like Fed-Safin matches. Fed has this feeling that the other guy has the goods to beat him if in form. But he has demolised Nalabndian more than twice in his eight wins, whereas the ones which Nalbandian has won have all been tight matches with Fed winning atleast a set or stretching a set to a tie-breaker. He has beated fed before in finals, and he had never played Nadal before their Madrid encounter. So its not as if, all of a sudden he started playing well.. after all he had been the No 3 player in the world.

But well.. doing that in 2 tournaments and doin it for a whole year is altogether a different proportion. Nadal looks Godly, and unbeatable when he is one his clay-run every year.. but he couldnt maintain it for the whole year. Thats why he has never come close to No 1 ranking all these years.

Regarding Fed losing to Nalby.. well he has played 13 matches in 16 days, a few 3 setters.. and if that doesnt tire you, what will. Nalby was more fresh after the break at Basel.
Also Fed has to play someone like Karlovic which just doesnt help in his preparation against Nalbandian on a slow court which he still hasnt come to grips with.

And i dont think Nalby will win the Master’s cup if he plays in Shanghai. Nadal and Fed will be more than ready for him this time.

Federer probably, Nadal probably not. Some people argue that Nalbandian should have been more tired than Federer because he played 2 matches while Federer had a bye. Well, in the Paris match, I really think preparation was the deciding factor. Federer definetly wasn’t as fresh as possible after winning in Basel, but the problem was that his first match was against Karlovic. Nalbandian played Almagro and Moya. Both Nalbandian and Federer are very rythmic players, they like rallying and working points. Federer hit forehand winners and service winners and pretty much nothing else against Karlovic. Nalbandian obviously got into a sufficient groove plus the mental edge and that’s why he won in straight sets. It was still close, but Nalbandian had 2 edges to help him out. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t an excuse. Nalbandian could have easily tanked that match but took advantage of his advantage and did what he had to do. Some one like Roddick would’ve probably f*cked it up but Nalbandian is a smart guy.

max619
congratulations to you on your guys success. I think the image from Nalby was that he was too distracted by car racing and he was out of shape. But even so, he had a great H2H with Fed and in 2005 won the master cup from nowhere. I really enjoy watching him ( as long as the opponent is not Rafa!).I would love to see him take out Fed in Shanghai and AO!

Sean, Fed was playing for 3 weeks straight before coming to Paris. I don’t think a bye will do it. Nalby played 45 matches all season. He is considerably fresher than many of those who played a whole year. This is not to undermine his great strokes and strategical game. but you can’t over rule it.

I don’t want to discuss Rafa’s loss here. maybe later. but Fed took a set from him in Madrid and in Paris, I would have been curious to see how he would play if he was not so tired. Shanghai will be a good place.

” He just doesn’t look godly, like he does against Roddick. Is it really as simple as court coverage? ”

To sensationalsafin……I dont agree with you on the fact that it’s just as simple as court coverage.Canas got thrashed by fed in madrid and its not like canas didnt try.Do you think fed can do the same to nalby if nalby is in the form he is now.Of course court coverage is one of the factors but its not like fed was so frustrated with nalby’s court coverage that he was spraying his shots like he did with Canas earlier this year.If you watch TM2005 final you’ll find that nalbandian’s unpredictable backhand and his wonderful return of serve did most of the damage.Quite frankly fed’s shots looked a little ordinary at those times.
There is no weaknesses for nalbandian’s groundstrokes which fed has exploited.nalby’s only weakness could be his serve and mental attitude.But with djokovic, fed did exploit a few weaknesses in the US open 2007 final.Example:-fed’s backhands down the line were clean winners…djok was not even near the ball,
fed’s sliced backhand to djok’s backhand resulted in UE because it robbed the pace of the ball etc, Sometimes it felt that fed moved djok around the court more than djok did to fed despite djok’s good court coverage.

To tejuz…..ur right about the fact that fed fears an in form nalbandian or safin atleast a little bit.This reduces the confidence in fed’s groundstrokes and helps his opponents.Whereas i personally dont think fed fears djok as much.It could also be due to the H2H record.

There’s been a lot of concentration on Federer (just for a change), but how about Nadal?

He had an outrageously good draw, and he had to get to the final if he wasn’t to look bad - that’s credit to him, because we know he’s going to try. On the other hand, no conclusions whatever can be drawn from Djokovic’s premature exit. The man just wasn’t there; he’ll be there at Shanghai. Different personalities.

Nadal’s one possible hurdle - Youzhny - was worn out the previous night in his battle against Haas. And then Baggy was just Baggy. Terrific tennis as you’d expect, and yet even when he was a set and a break up, you just knew Nadal would win. People like Jane are forever saying that Fed wins many matches by default (not taking anything away from him, brilliant and all that, but; I just love Jane’s qualifications..) because his opponents don’t believe they can win. Even that dastardly Djokovic, in whom so many hopes were reposed, let the side down in New York with a choke of monumental proportions, drat the fellow. And there is some truth in this. But imo, this constraint actually applies with more cogency to Nadal’s opponents. They get that startled look in their eyes, a rabbit before the headlights. At 0 - 30 and 2 - 0 in second set, Baggy, who had been looking reasonably cheerful, was wearing that look. You knew the match was essentially over, although plenty more nice tennis.

So Nadal fulfilled his part of the bargain and strolled into the final. And there he met a man who, far from being afraid of him, actually relished playing him. The rest is history, but I think there are repercussions. The manner of Nadal’s loss, his disintegration, this will have been noticed by his fellow players. The man’s human after all sort of thing. This counts, and Nadal will have lost a certain edge. People like Gasquet, for example, who definitely have the game to beat Nadal, but have hitherto lacked the mind, will be encouraged.

Meanwhile, I don’t agree with Tejuz that Nadal will be ready for Nalbandian in Shangai. Nalbandian is just better than Nadal, and if he hasn’t gone walkabout, he will win. Even on clay, he’s in with a shout - look for surprises at RG.

grendel,
you noted something very important about Nadal. If he knows he will win, he will.

I don’t make a lot of fuss about Youzhny being tired. RAfa went to play Nalby after a 3 setter with Baghdatis in Paris and after another one in Madrid. He never made that an excuse for his loss. Neither Youzhny can make that excuse, It goes for everyone.

About the mental edge, again I disagree. Youzhny had won Rafa twice on hard courts . The first one was a thrashing in USOpen 2006. Youzhny had the mental edge in Paris but Rafa won. It is not about what Rafa’s opponente belive. It is what Rafa himself believe he can do. Against Nalby he did not believe he could win that match. It was so obvious.

Nalbandian has always been a great player. I think this challenge will make Rafa a better player, as Rafa and Nalby and Hewitt’s challenge made Federer a better player. Rafa may or may not win Nalby in Shanghai or AO , but he will try to improve and win him one day and that’s what makes Rafa such a tough opponent.

I remember last year at this time everyone was writing Rafa off. But he came back in 2007 with a more aggressive game and more net play. So, I know he is working on different things in his game and that’s the important thing. As long as he is willing to learn and change, defeats can only be another lesson for him.

“Meanwhile, I don’t agree with Tejuz that Nadal will be ready for Nalbandian in Shangai. Nalbandian is just better than Nadal, and if he hasn’t gone walkabout, he will win. Even on clay, he’s in with a shout - look for surprises at RG”

Do agree with grendel…..during the french open there were a lot of guys in this blog who used to say that nalby had a chance against nadal on whichever surface…They were right.Nadal looked dazed.He just didnt know what to do against nalbandian.All he tried to do was to keep nalby on the move but that didnt work.Nadal’s second serve gets thrashed by nalbandian’s returns.If he tries to go to nalbandian’s forehand like he goes to federer’s backhand then that’s not going to work either.So i guess nadal’s knees will shake the next time they play.By the way did rafa figure out youzhny?He’s been losing to him for the last 2 or 3 matches now.

This doesn’t make any sense. This isn’t the juniors where when one kid is better than another he’s always going to win just because he’s better. In the pros there’s no telling who’s gonna win on any given day. That’s tennis in general, too, but this is how the pros work. This is what makes Federer’s dominance actually more strange than unbelievable. Somehow, he took all the unpredictability out of the game, which is why some people don’t like him. But the way Nalbandian thrashes world number 2 Nadal like it’s the way it’s supposed to be and always gonna be, that’s just bad for the game honestly. You don’t wanna see Nadal losing so badly on a consistent basis. I think this further proves my point that Nalbandian is just playing perfect tennis and will drop atleast a little by next year.