Nadal Weathers Gasquet, Murray Finally Gets Over on Djokovic
by Sean Randall | July 26th, 2008, 11:45 am
  • 169 Comments

Make it 27 straight wins and climbing now for Rafael Nadal after last night’s impressive 6-7(12), 6-2, 6-1 performance over Richard Gasquet at the Rogers Cup in Toronto last night. I wasn’t able to watch the match but from the comments and reports it seems as though Gasquet played about as well as he possible could have to win that first set.

What’s striking to me is that when a talented player like Gasquet playing at his very highest of levels still needs to go to 14-12 in a tiebreak just to wrestle a set away from Nadal who is playing on arguably his worst surface! That tells you just how tough Nadal really is right now. And then as we’ve seen many times before this year, when down a set or in a deep hole, Nadal doesn’t panic, doesn’t get discouraged, he just has the discipline to go right back to work on the task at hand. The guy’s mental toughness is really amazing.

Gasquet’s surprising me, though. After his Davis Cup debacle earlier this year and poor clay season I thought he’d really just go through the motions the rest of the 2008. But the Frenchman played a good Wimbledon – that is until he royally gagged when serving for the match against Murray – and again put up some good results in Toronto this week. Game-wise he’s right there with anyone but I think mentally it looks like he’s still going to need some more “seasoning”, maybe a couple years even, before he really becomes a consistent threat and a serious Slam contender like he should be. But I like the way he’s bounced back from adversity. That’s a good sign for the rest of the year.

Earlier last night Andy Murray finally got his first career “W” over Novak Djokovic. As the ESPN2 commentary team pointed out, Murray, who was 0-4 vs. the Serb with just one set win, really took it to Novak, hitting with far more pace and aggression than what we usually see from him. The Scot is learning and recognizing. The off-pace moonballs game plan simply didn’t work against Novak, so Murray went a different route and it paid off nicely.

As for Novak, I saw just the first set and at that time he wasn’t playing particularly well, making a lot of easy errors. As I said before, I think the weight of pressure, the expectations, the fact that his countrywomen Ana Ivanovic is already No. 1 and Jelena Jankovic on the verge and of course how Nadal and Roger Federer are seemingly pulling away from again are all getting to the Serb.

Novak was far and away the No. 1 played on hard courts the first three months. He’s not anymore and I don’t think he’s the same player. I think he’s really feeling the pressure and this loss to Murray isn’t going to help.

The loss also means no Djokovic-Nadal semifinal. I didn’t talk much about this semifinal possibility in my earlier posts because I just didn’t think it would happen. On paper it was hard at least for me not to see it, but in some ways I’m not so sure the players wanted it or were ready for such stern test this early in the hard court season. I almost got the sense that maybe Novak didn’t want to run into Rafa here. And vice-versa, had Novak won last night maybe Rafa would have taken Gasquet a little lighter. Maybe. Just a feeling I had, it’s neither here nor there.

As for the other semifinal, I thought from the outset that we could very well get a surprise finalist here, and well it’s happened again as we’ll have either Gilles Simon or Nicolas Kiefer in the title match. Who picked that?

Kiefer crushed James Blake, 6-1, 6-2. If you are James Blake you cannot let that happen. The win isn’t terribly surprising as Kiefer’s a very tricky customer, but the scoreline really is.

Also yesterday, Simon continued his hot streak ending the run of Marin Cilic, 3-6, 6-2, 6-3. Simon has now won nine straight matches including his win at Indianapolis last Sunday.

So for today, we have Simon v. Kiefer and Murray v. Nadal. And I’ll go with both hot guys, Simon and Nadal.

Simon and Kiefer have never played until today, and the two will actually play again in the first round at Cincinnati on Tuesday (more on the Cincy draw later). And I think Kiefer will do all he can to disrupt the Frenchman, but tired or not, Simon should get the job done here (though I like Kiefer to win in Cincy!)

As for the main event 7pm night match, Nadal’s really had his way with Murray recently. Since their five-set battle in Australia last year won by Rafa, the Spaniard has won three straight and all seven sets over Andy including a thumping in the Wimbledon quarterfinals earlier this month.

But I feel hard courts is Murray’s best surface and Rafa’s worst, so the Scot should make this one a true, tight test. Yet in the end it’s really hard to pick against Rafa right now when he’s just that close to No. 1. I’ll say 28 it is for Rafa tonight and then he gets No. 29 tomorrow with No. 1 soon to come.


Also Check Out:
Rain Pushes Djokovic-Nadal To Monday; Sharapova Out-Weathers Li Na For Rome Title
Nadal Weathers Djokovic Storm, Wins Fifth Straight Monte Carlo Masters Title
Andy Murray Says He’s Finally Able To Train Like He Used To
Here’s Video Of Richard Gasquet Beating Rafael Nadal In Juniors When They Were 13
Novak Djokovic, Leader of the New Pack in Tennis

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

169 Comments for Nadal Weathers Gasquet, Murray Finally Gets Over on Djokovic

Dave B Says:

It’s as if Murray was reborn. He really stayed under control while Jockitch lost it. Some pretty high quality tennis. Murray certainly has proved something. Hope he continues to improve.


Chokovic Says:

Wonderful exhibition of choking from Chokovic/choker/joker/jerkovic. Chokovic fans – be glad that murray beat him, else nadal would have given him a public colonoscopy today.

Serves the Jerk right! Flashing the no.1 sign in the 2nd set at hamburg against Rafa. He has not won a set against rafa since then. Who will be the next no.1 now?


rafa4ever Says:

Very exciting TB in Nadal’s QF. Reeeshard played unexpectedly well, sadly, he cannot sustain (as expected). Nadal alllllll the way. VAMOS RAFA!!!


Rafa Rocks Says:

It is Rafa time baby! No.1 and US open – here comes Rafa!


Shital Green Says:

From yesterday’s interview (?), Nadal: “The ranking says I’m the No. 2, so I feel the No. 2.”

Gasquet: “He [Nadal] the best player in the world for me, and it will be really hard for one player to win against him.”

Even when most of the world has already accepted Nadal as the No. 1 by this time, Nadal will wait until Fed formally concedes? Is Nadal saying he will feel the No.1 when Fed says it is ok? Is he saying, “I understand it is really difficult for you to drop down to No. 2, so I will be nice with you and wait until you are mentally/ emotionally ready to concede even after the ATP Ranking Chart puts me at the top. You take your time, pal.”

Or, is there an inadvertent cruelty underlying the this surface nicety? Could it be a subtle way to torture Fed as his No. 1 position is questioned and is forced to assert in speech, an obvious recognition of the failure to assert in action, “I am still the No. 1″ a few more times, while most of us,like Gasquet in above quote, feel otherwise? By being forced to say he’s still no. 1, every day he will look more ridiculous from now onward.

What do yo’ll think?

In my math, if Nadal wins at Toronto and reaches semi at Cincy, he will officially surpass Fed, even if Fed wins Cincy, but ATP’s article requires Nadal to reach Final at Cincy to achieve the same. I may have missed something somewhere. I’d appreciate if somebody explains that to me (JCF, Daniel, Ra, Gordo, Noel, Vulcan, Giner, Matt, FoT, SG, Ryan, or whoever).


jane Says:

Murray was reborn at Wimbledon when he beat Gasquet; I don’t know if people here watched that match, but Murray was aggressive when he needed to be and he had such guts. Even though Rafa beat him in the quarters there, Rafa played probably some of his best grass court tennis to do it. Rafa was amazing against Murray – very aggressive no errors etc.

Murray needs a big event win, and he wants one badly too. I’d love to see him get it.

But as Sean says, how do you pick against Rafa? It’s awfully difficult to do.

I think we’ll see Novak back to his early year self soon enough; I could be wrong, but that’s what I think. His second set against Murray was great – until the tiebreak. So, I think he should be fine the rest of the season.

Both Novak and Rafa have tougher draws in Cincy, but both lost early last year so stand to gain points. Murray’s got a tough section in Cincy. Roger’s draw is pretty basic – he may meet Roddick in the quarters, again (!) – but he’s also defending a title.

The schedule feels jam-packed as a fan; I can’t imagine how the players feel!


jane Says:

Just wanted to reiterate what a pleasure it was to watch Richard in that first set last night – wow. So exciting. Makes me wish, like everyone else, that he’d get it together and play like that regularly.


jane Says:

Shital Green – I may actually know the answer to this one! Shocking! It might be because they haven’t yet removed Stuggart points from last year? I don’t know, but I thought I read a discussion on that recently.


sar Says:

Q. Did he say anything to you at the net or afterwards?
ANDY MURRAY: No, just, Good luck and well-played. Play well the rest of the tournament. I saw him in the locker room afterwards and had a little chat, but nothing too much.

What a class act Novak is with his comments to and about Murray.


TD (Tam) Says:

Sean- “Gasquet playing at his very highest of levels still needs to go to 14-12 in a tiebreak just to wrestle a set away from Nadal who is playing on arguably his worst surface!”

You in the media should know by now that Nadal does not have a weak or worst surface he can play them all.


FoT Says:

Shital Green, Nadal is saying he is not #1 because when you go on the ATP site… he is ‘officially’ listed as #2 still. Remember, the schedule is all wacked up this year due to the Olympics so the Toronto tournament points from last year are still counted in the rankings because that tournament was held later in the year last year, and those points won’t come off until that week gets here this year. Confusing, I know.

But from what I understand, “officially” Nadal can take the #1 spot in Cincy (depending on what he and Roger does).

These 2 players have too much respect for each other for Nadal to even be thinking about some of the suggestions you mentioned. He (Nadal) is just going by the ‘official’ ranking until he says he’s #1 (something everyone already knows is unofficial) – and this is from the #1 Fed fan around!

There is no question that this year Nadal is #1 and I’m sure the ‘official’ rankings will reflect it soon. However, on some other boards some stupid fans have the nerve to say that since Roger is not #1 he needs to retire! What kind of logic is that!? Some fans are saying Roger need to retire because he’s all washed up. These are the fans that just irks me to no end… But I tried to just ignore them.

Be patient Nadal fans… the “official” ranking will be changed soon. As a Fed fan, I’m just enjoying these last few weeks for him as being the #1 ranked player. But even when Nadal gets #1, I know Roger isn’t going to just lay down and give up… He’ll be fighting tooth and nails to get it back, which will be great for tennis.


jane Says:

Sar – yes, and he applauded on court too; it’s obvious Novak respects Murray and is aware of his talent. He’s been saying for a long time that Murray is a top five guy and I agree with Nole. He probably is feeling pressure, but he didn’t talk about it much; he gave all credit to Murray.

I hope the Murray & Rafa semi is a good one – last year in Madrid, I think, was two sets but two very entertaining ones.


jane Says:

FoT

“on some other boards some stupid fans have the nerve to say that since Roger is not #1 he needs to retire! What kind of logic is that!?”

That is silly; just because Roger isn’t number 1 doesn’t mean he should retire. I do think that a break might be good, just to regroup, but can’t see him taking it. All he needs to do is keep playing his game. If he’s #2, 3, or 5, that’s nothing to shake a stick at – sheesh! He’s still a contender just not the top dog.

Rafa is the best player in the world now; I have to agree with Boris Becker and Johnny Mac.


FoT Says:

Jane, I agree that Rafa is the best player right now. No question. And I also agree with you regarding those stupid fans saying he needs to retire! Here’s a quote from one of them:

“It would be good for him to retire. He is a shadow of the player he used to be and he certainy will never win another grand slam. It is best to retire now before he drops out of the top 3.”

Now according to that logic, I guess Roddick, Davydenko, and all the other top players need to retire too! This is what a lot of us Federer fans have to put up with throughout the internet. lol!


jane Says:

FoT,

Well at least you Fed fans have had 4 years of winning everything! I am a fan of a few players, my main guy being Novak, so I am used to a lot of ridiculous, mean-spirited comments. You should just ignore them; you know Fed’s still one of the best players around and you know what he has achieved is phenomenal. Just scoll over the trolls. :-)


zola Says:

Shital
I am sure you would have grilled Nadal further had he said that “yes, I feel like No 1″.

Federer is still No 1 because of all the points he has accumulated and right now they are more than Rafa’s.

When and if Rafa surpasses Fed in the rankings, then ATP will announce him as No 1. Then he can feel as No 1!

He talks with his racquet and deosn’t like to brag. He also respects the position Fed and himself are in. Might be hard for you to understand. But that’s as simple as that.


zola Says:

FoT
I think that was a stupid journalist who asked Roger about Henin’s retirement.

Roger and his fans have to just ignore the stupid comments. Unfortunately life at the top is cruel. They either worship you or bury you when you are done. As a Nadal fan, we have experienced this each year on the hard court season. I am sure Fed will be back and give them the appropriate answer. He may not be No 1, or as dominant as before, but he sure has many GSs titles waiting for him. He also said he wanted to play another 10 years and that’s what we want to see too.


Shital Green Says:

FoT,
Ref: “on some other boards some stupid fans have the nerve to say that since Roger is not #1 he needs to retire!”

I condemn those irrational remarks. Although I am not a big Fed fan as such (only a critical admirer), I have said this before and I say it again I still like the beauty of his game and would like to see him around at least 3-4 more years. When he reaches 30, he may want to start thinking about retirement, but again it depends on how he will be performing physically and skillfully. I honestly think that he will win a couple of more GS in the next couple of years.
And I agree with you, “But even when Nadal gets #1, I know Roger isn’t going to just lay down and give up… He’ll be fighting tooth and nails to get it back, which will be great for tennis.”

Jane / FoT,
I am still missing 150 points somewhere in between. Even after taking into account Stuttgart and rescheduling, I cannot find that 150 points.
ATP: “Nadal is 770 points behind Federer this week but could cut that lead to a mere 300 points should he win the Rogers Cup.”
In my math, Fed’s lead drops down to 150 points if Nadal wins here. I still don’t know how I got it wrong.


zola Says:

About Djoko/Roddick/Fed’s exit…

THis is the first hard court event after a two week rest. So I certainly expect the playrs to be better by each event. The inportant point is that they are all healthy ( I hope Roddick’s back injury is gone).

Apart from Rafa, who is really motivated right now, it was a pleasure to see Murray and Gasquet play so well. They both had hard time, mentally and physically. Seeing them putting things back together and play their game was fantastic. last night I was thinking if Gasquet could play like that for three sets, who could stop him?


zola Says:

Shital

***In my math, Fed’s lead drops down to 150 points if Nadal wins here. I still don’t know how I got it wrong.***

I have the same number. I don’t know why they say the lead will be 300 points if Rafa wins Toronto.


Shital Green Says:

Zola,
Ref: “you would have grilled Nadal further had he said that “yes, I feel like No 1.″

First off, I like Rafa. When and where have I “grilled” Rafa, now or in the past? Why would I “grill” him? Do I have to take your permission before I speculate about an event and its possible effects? Did I say anything definitively bad about Rafa above?

I have not seen Nadal talking down to others like you do either about other players and/or their fans. Has Nadal ever said Djoko and Roddick are irritating like you have and still do? If you think you are his fan, following his example of the way he speaks about others would be true homage to him. Otherwise, I would just have to say you oppose Rafa’s example of respect for others. One does not have to be insensitive and reactionary to be a fan.


zola Says:

Shital,
please read your post before lecturing me:

***
Or, is there an inadvertent cruelty underlying the this surface nicety? Could it be a subtle way to torture Fed as his No. 1 position is questioned and is forced to assert in speech, an obvious recognition of the failure to assert in action, “I am still the No. 1″ a few more times, while most of us,like Gasquet in above quote, feel otherwise? By being forced to say he’s still no. 1, every day he will look more ridiculous from now onward.

****

This suggestion of cruelty, is when he remains respectful to Federer. What would have been your judgement if he had said”yes, I am No 1″?


Ra Says:

I don’t know if anyone has noticed or mentioned that the Cincy draw is out, but it is.


jane Says:

Some people have speculated about Rafa’s unerring and unrelenting humility with regards to Roger before; this isn’t the first time. I believe grendel was one who always wondered how sincere Rafa is in his outward persona. Others have pointed out that they find his humility a bit overdone, like Kroll, who is in fact a Rafa fan – but a very objective one.

So it’s fair to speculate.

I don’t think Shital came right out and accused Rafa of anything; he was just wondering about it – and he even posed the question “what do you all think?” at the end of his post.


Henry Says:

Shital and Zola you are absolutely right. IF Nadal wins Toronto(which many of us hope), he will only be 150 points behind Federer. Should Federer be successful at defending his title and Nadal makes it to the semis, Nadal will be the new No1. What the ATP website forgets to mention though, is that if Federer does not make it to the final, Nadal will be the new No.1 even without playing….


zola Says:

Jane,
you could have been the head of the UN. You always want to restore peace and I appreciate it.

well, implying cruely and trying to torture Fed is rather harsh and unfair . Even if it follows: “what do you think!”

Anyway,
seems kiefer-Simon might go to a third set. I don’y like it that they have scheduled the semis one after another. One player will have less time to rest and that’s not fair.

Andy is playing great and I think it will be a difficult match for RAfa. I hope he can win.

Henry
thanks a lot for the calculations. I don’t know where 300 comes from. Rafa has a tough draw in cincy and who knows what will happen.


Von Says:

PLEASE NOTE:

Can I please ask everyone a favor of NOT stating the results of the SF matches before ESPN begins THEIR DELAYED broadcast at 8:00 p.m. tonight. Somehow, knowing the results beforehand takes away from the excitement of watching the match. Two more hours to go and then I can watch the matches with breathless anticipation, similar to a kid waiting for the pizza party to begin. Mmmm, yummy. :)


Shital Green Says:

Zola,
My post is well calculated in the choice of words. If you don’t know English, “inadvertently” means “without intending,” which frees Rafa from any responsibility, and it moves in the direction of putting the “intention” on perception of readers, including Federer, and that sentence is interrogative, not affirmative, and starts with “Or,” meaning alternative. The second sentence starts with “Could,” suggesting uncertainty (with less force than “can”) and ends with a question mark. And the clause after “as” has nothing to do with Rafa because it is in passive form, meaning questions by media/people are self evident (who is questioning Fed’s No. 1 position is less relevant than the act). Nowhere in the post I indicate that this is my position or this is what I think. I simply “wonder.” This section ends with, “What yo’ll think?” That question seeks response from others. Asking what other people think is not “grilling.”

Compare your quoted paragraph with the one before that, which starts with, “Even when most of the world has already accepted Nadal as the No. 1 by this time, Nadal will wait…” Every sentence in that paragraph starts with more certainty. First sentence is an affirmative sentence, with unequivocal acknowledgment of Rafa’s achievement.I have only praised Rafa there. Then, each question begins with “Is,” followed by “will,” not “Could.” I hope you know the difference.

Had he said, “I feel what I should feel” “I feel I am getting there,” I would have no comment. I have no problem with what he said about feeling No. 2, either. I was only wondering the effect of that statement on Federer, not on what Rafa intended.

You said, “He talks with his racquet and deosn’t like to brag.” Let’s say you are Rafa’s spokesperson, as you evidently act like one, and you are speaking to the media, then that speaking through racket would still sound like bragging, despite your intention being otherwise. If Rafa said the same, it would be, “I speak through my racket. I don’t brag.” This would be bragging, too. Do I have problem with that? No, I would say Rafa has changed.

What’s your response to sounding blatantly “irritating” to Roddick and Djokovic fans? Are you being nice by calling other players “irritating”?


I love the Game Says:

Zola

I agree with you, although I very much enjoy Shital Green posts but since his guy lost he has been very bitter and I really found his statements about rafa’s humility distateful.


Roddick is a saint Says:

Shital green,Jane,Zola,Henry:

What you guys/girls are forgetting is that the 2007 evens’ points are going to drop only when 52 weeks have passed while this year’s events’ points will presumably-i am almost certain now-will be added as part of the other countable five events.I presume you are aware of the reasons for this absurd situation of 10 or possibly 11 ams events going into the rankings breakdown(early scheduling due to olympics).I had responded to a query from matt on the 25 th and I reproduce it to see if I can clarify things a bit.The first para appears irrelevant and can be safely ignored.

Noel Says:

Matt,
That is indeed very absurd but is probably not correct if I were to go by what happened earlier this year after the lesser events i.e. the international series events at estoril,stuttgart etc.The atp adheres to a strict 52 week rolling system and therefore the points for the 2007 events that you have mentioned will drop from the system only when the 52 weeks have passed.The 2008 events’ points will probably enter the system only then.It really hasn’t been a talking point so far because the big players like Djokovic and Nadal didn’t play at estoril and stuttgart respectively where they were defending champs.I am sure we’d have talked about it if Nadal had played and won stuttgart and his ranking points breakdown after 14th july would have shown two stuttgart(2007 and 2008)events as part of his best of five other events.The stuttgart 2007 points dropped off only on 21st july.I can’t confirm if stuttgart 2008 ponts entered the system on 14th july or on 21st july because the atp rankings database is in a mess as always.I get the feeling-I am almost certain- that all performances and the points of the current year events will enter the system only when 52 weeks have passed from last year’s events and we won’t have double-counting in that case.I hope some forum member can verify this.

The atp also says that the rankings constitue the 4 slams plus the 9 ams events plus 5 other events besides the tmc.It really will be interesting to see if the atp handles this any differently than what it has done so far if we consider the double-counting scenario.Will it allow only the best nine of the ten or eleven ams performances or allow the additonal 2007 events as part of the best of five other countable events as also the tmc.Obviously,this second scenario is a bit complicated and I think we are not going to see this.Another option,equally unlikely,is to stop releasing the official rankings or freeze/suspend it for a while before we get back on track on the monday after the olympics i.e.18th august.
How I wish the atp’s past rankings data on its website were not in a mess!

Posted July 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am

At that time I was thinking that the 2008 events’ point will enter the system only when 2007 points drop off but your discussion about the fed-rafa ‘race’ put me thinking and the second ‘unlikely’ and ‘complicated’ scenario that I envisaged in my post to matt appears true.Matt thought about it first but logically said that it sounded absurd and wondered if it could indeed be true and he has been proven correct.I just did a calculation and if you add 500 points to rafa ‘s existing tally of 5830 and deduct 25 points for rotterdem,rafa will have 6305 points because he is keeping his 2007 canada ams points as well.Fed only gets 5 points for his pathetic 2008 ams canada show and he will have 6605 points which gives the difference of 300 points that you say atp is talking about.Fed doesn’t drop any points because he only has Four other countable events in his ranking breakdown and therefore has ‘room’ to accommodate an additional event without dropping some other event like rotterdem in Rafa’s case.I hope I have clarified more than i have confused you.


Mandy Says:

I think Roger will lose 350 point. So, his lead will be 420 point if Rafa gets to the semi in Toronto. If Rafa wins Toronto, Rafa will be just (770-350 ) – (500-225) = 145 points behind Roger. Am I Correct?


JCF Says:

“The loss also means no Djokovic-Nadal semifinal. I didn’t talk much about this semifinal possibility in my earlier posts because I just didn’t think it would happen. On paper it was hard at least for me not to see it, but in some ways I’m not so sure the players wanted it or were ready for such stern test this early in the hard court season. I almost got the sense that maybe Novak didn’t want to run into Rafa here. And vice-versa, had Novak won last night maybe Rafa would have taken Gasquet a little lighter. Maybe. Just a feeling I had, it’s neither here nor there.”

I liked your article until you got to that part. You’re saying Rafa and Nole are afraid to play each other, and would rather tank a match to avoid the encounter? W…T…F.


Noel Says:

The above post is not by Roddick is a saint. my cousin has been fooling around with me and put it in my name box.I realized it only after sending my post.I have read a post by a poster by the same name today and I think my cousin did as well.I repeat again that I have nothing to do with the poster posting with this name.


Shital Green Says:

I love the Game,

I think I made myself clear in the last post that I do not have any problem with Rafa’s humility. I was not commenting on his humility per se but wondering on the unintended effect of that humility. And there are 2 parts in my speculation: One very positive; the other not so. You cannot take one part if you want to be fair to the entire post. And I was only asking you guys to think. I was not giving any kind of definitive verdict. I have never questioned (and will never question) how a player responds to a particular query in an interview or elsewhere.
Thanks for reading and enjoying my posts, though.
I apologize if I sounded bitter.

Roddick Is Saint,
Now it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.


Shital Green Says:

Noel,
Thank you 2nd time.


Von Says:

Roddick is a saint/ aka Noel (and probably a host of other impostors):

Well, you’re a rather sneaky one. So sneaky that your trickery outsmarted you. What do i mean? Take a look at your post of 7:33 pm to Shital, jane, et al., in which you “reproduced” your July 25, 2008, at 11:55 am to Matt, wherein you used your post name of Noel. However, a con artist always gets conned by his own hands, YOU FORGOT TO CHANGE YOUR “RODDICK IS A SAINT” post name, back to Noel. In that post you blasted myself and several other posters in defense of Federer in a gutless manner, not using your ever so fair and sweet “Noel” post name designation. What a hypocrite.

WOW, you are something else and then some. In your prior posts to me you pretended to be so cordial and accommodating while playing a game with me and others. My God, what a revelation!! Probably all of the other “Roddick is a Donkey” posts coupled with some of the other Roddick is ???? designations, is really you in disguise. I am repulsed that anyone could stoop so low whie pretending to be so nice. You are indeed a piece of work. I hope you can absorb the enormity of your foolishness and take this as a lesson that when we do evil, evil will befall us. for someone who claims that he is not very computer savvy, you’re savvy enough to use guile and treachery, but your stupidity has backfired on you and I doubt whether nyone could trust you.

Who knows, you could be Spin and all the others who have suddenly arrived along with NOEL. cARRY ON SMART-LESS-ly!! HERE’S A SMILEY FOR YOU, THE ONES YOU CLAIMED YOU DIDN’T KNOW HOW TO MAKE, and this fool showed you how. This occasion warrants four (4) of them. Here goes: :D , :P , :) , :(

GOODBYE NOEL.


Von Says:

Noel:

I didn’t see your post of 7:52 pm until after I submitted my post of 8:03 pm that you posted to the effect that you did not write that post by Roddick is a saint. Sorry, Noel, I don’t believe you. The style and language is the same as yours. No spacing after periods, using lower case for proper nouns, etc. Tell me Noel, if that wasn’t you, then you knew all along that someone else was using your computer, posting offensive posts about Roddick with fictitious names? Why? I am befuddled!!


Von Says:

Noel:

This is the post that was posted earlier. Compare the style and punctuation. It’s the same as your post.

Roddick is a saint Says:
How ridiculous and cheap Federer haters can get.Gosh,people invent newer and newer sicks to beat Federer with.This is juvenile and absolutely staggering to suggest that Federer’s ‘vanity’ and ‘greed’ have led to his problems.Please add that all other players on the tour are playing for charity or philanthropy and Andy Roddick is their patron saint.These guys are professional tennis players for christ’s sake and many of them want the same thing(money,fame and possibly a place in tennis history) that Federer has been accused of being greedy about.They will give an arm and a leg for a life and career like that.Roddick is not working his ass out to get beaten easily and being charitable to his opponent.He wants to win titles and the money that comes with it.Professional athletes do not have a long career and it is understandable that they will like to make hay when the sun shines.At least he does something with his charitable foundation which is more than can be said about for other players.He can make even more money by playing a lot more events and ask for big appearance fees but his schedule over the last four years has been very conservative and he does not play even the 18/19 events per year that most players play at the very least.And to compare him to a greedy doctor!!His problems have nothing to do with playing some fun matches with sampras.He did not feel well throughout the off-season and missed important practice sessions before and after Australian open due to illness.Once his season begins in full earnest from Dubai onwards,he does not get any time to work on his game.His next ‘break’ between London and Toronto was very short.With davis cup after the us open,he won’t get the time he feels comfortable with to work on his game.
It is the same ‘greed’ or ambition and motivation that eggs on great players and forces them to tread a very thin line between enjoying the game and stressing and pressurizing themselves for that extra effort that makes all the difference.It involves a lot of tradeoffs and compromises and sacrifices but that is the price of success.No one can have everything.Borg/Henin could not handle the stress and walked away.Sampras won’t be wondering today about what went ‘wrong’ with his career and he will be much happier for it.An Andy Roddick will never feel the same if he was ambitious enough to begin with.

I can understand someone’s hatred for a guy who has thrashed his/her favorite player a lot of times but crass and below the belt comments about his girlfriend betray absolutely zero knowledge about human relationships.It sounds as if Mirka is a foolish,pitiable, bonded slave and Federer is the ruthless,cynical and cruel master exploiting her.They know much better than we do.They could break up tomorrow or can live together for the rest of their lives and whether they should marry or not won’t be decided by the patron saint’s unofficial pr guy.Sampras married bridgette wilson jones in a hurry but dumped at least two previous girlfriends equally quickly.
It is natural for people to get fed up of the season’s grind and some can get bored doing it year after year.Motivation levels particularly at smaller events goes down and it becomes difficult to look forward to doing things you loved doing earlier.Novak djokovic is apparently getting tired mentally already and he has just begun his career!!

Posted July 26th, 2008 at 2:10 pm

You pretend to like Djokovic yet you took a swipe at him, oh, but that’s not you, it was Roddick is a saint. Yes?


Shital Green Says:

The intensity of the match is really high. Except the tie break, both are playing at their level best. Murray is missing his forehand more than other matches he played here, so obviously Nadal is capitalizing on that, frequently returning to his forehand. As always, Nadal’s defense is unbelievable, returning from normally impossible places. Murray had 3 opportunities to break Nadal in the opening game of the 2nd set, but could not covert any (6 deuces). At times Murray is producing spectacular cross court backhand shots. Strangely, Murray is missing easier balls more often than difficult ones. At the end, it looks like this is Rafa’s to take and inch in for the coveted No. 1.


blah Says:

Great Match. Murray challenged Nadal, but like the Gasquet match, Nadal endures and moves on.

I am not so sure Nadal wouldn’t be the favorite going into us open with each match he plays. He is just a machine right now.


Shital Green Says:

Congratulation to Nadal !
Credit for Murray for elevating his level through out this tournament and putting up some fight !


I love the Game Says:

Shital

apologies accepted,but its a free world and thats what makes it intersting the ability to express our minds.

That was some an outstanding match,Murrays backhand was awesome.I was afraid for my boy(Rafa).
But for Rafa to win HC GS he has to increase his serve speed.


jane Says:

Yep, nice match – great challenge from Murray; he stayed positive throughout. And Rafa continues to impress us all! Numero uno Rafa Nadal! Congrats!


Kroll Says:

What a brilliant match, much closer than the score reflected for sure. I was very impressed by Murray’s performance and the character he showed, especially the two excellent shots he hit to save the match points. Rafa was pretty good too though I think he was patchy at times with the peak being his choke while facing breakpoints in the second set to double fault.
And inspite of the apparent flaws in his game as far as hardcourts are concerned, namely the high backlift on the forehand and the topspin, he’s actually made up for them somewhat by playing really really deep. Though I feel that the hardcourts here offer a little more bounce than USO so its hard to say what will happen at the slam.


JCF Says:

Shital (how do you pronounce that name anyway?)

“Even when most of the world has already accepted Nadal as the No. 1 by this time, Nadal will wait until Fed formally concedes? Is Nadal saying he will feel the No.1 when Fed says it is ok? Is he saying, “I understand it is really difficult for you to drop down to No. 2, so I will be nice with you and wait until you are mentally/ emotionally ready to concede even after the ATP Ranking Chart puts me at the top. You take your time, pal.”

Or, is there an inadvertent cruelty underlying the this surface nicety? Could it be a subtle way to torture Fed as his No. 1 position is questioned and is forced to assert in speech, an obvious recognition of the failure to assert in action, “I am still the No. 1″ a few more times, while most of us,like Gasquet in above quote, feel otherwise? By being forced to say he’s still no. 1, every day he will look more ridiculous from now onward.

What do yo’ll think? ”

No, I think Nadal is just being sensitive to Roger’s pain. He knows how much Wimbledon meant to him, and what a tough defeat feels like. He’s not the kind of person that would want to torture someone. Every time he wins a big match against Fed, he prostrates himself, but not at RG this year. He knew if he celebrated like that, it would have been inappropriate and rude to Fed. He’s just not that insensitive.

“In my math, if Nadal wins at Toronto and reaches semi at Cincy, he will officially surpass Fed, even if Fed wins Cincy, but ATP’s article requires Nadal to reach Final at Cincy to achieve the same. I may have missed something somewhere. I’d appreciate if somebody explains that to me (JCF, Daniel, Ra, Gordo, Noel, Vulcan, Giner, Matt, FoT, SG, Ryan, or whoever).”

OK, here’s my attempt.

Fed – 6600
Rafa – 5830

Fed will gain 5, and if we assume Rafa wins the title, he gains 500. So after Toronto:

Fed – 6605
Rafa – 6330

That’s 275 points difference. A finals spot is worth 350, a semi final is worth 225. If Rafa makes the final, and Fed loses in the 2nd round (R32), Rafa will be #1. If Rafa makes the final and Fed loses in R16, then they will be tied for #1! They will both have exactly 6680.

Fed is lucky and has a buffer because last year’s ranking points will not be deducted for another two weeks, so he can still gain points in Cincy, and hasn’t lost any in Toronto.

What this means is, that it’s unlikely Rafa will overtake him after Cincy. Fed will get a chance to gain some free points at the Olympics in the event that Rafa gains points in Cincy, and thus if he does better at the Olympics may avoid losing his #1 ranking.

Here’s something interesting… If last year’s points were deducted at the end of the event instead of two weeks later, and if Rafa beats Kiefer and wins the title, then Fed and Rafa would both be joint #1 with 6105 points. I have never seen joint #1 before.


rjnick Says:

In response to whoever made the comment about Rafa not wanting to proclaim himself number 1 — I think more than anything it has to do with the fact that he doesn’t want to put himself in a position of declaring himself him #1, and then having his hardcourt season go horribly wrong. By the rankings, he is still number 2. And for all the speculation, it could also not happen for him. And Rafa is well known for his superstitious quirks, and it might just be that he doesn’t want to jinx it (as someone else posted earlier, a lesson Djokovic has since learned).

As for the math — the ATP site says that no change in rankings will take place before the Olympics. The scheduling means that the 2007 Canada and Cincinnati results won’t come off until just before the Games begin. So for 2 weeks players will have 2 Masters events count — I think it’s a quirk that counts all Masters events, even when there’s 2 more than there should be. So Rafa could clinch it in Cincinnati, but it won’t actually show up until right before Beijing.

Alas, I don’t think it will happen. Rafa has never played well in Cincinnati and I just don’t see him winning both Toronto and Cincy. As it is, a win tomorrow would be his first post-Wimbledon win since 2005. And my hunch is he’ll ease up and sacrifice Cincy in order be at his best in Beijing and New York — and the big push for number 1.


Von Says:

Murray’s game has improved tremendously. I like his new change of attitude; it’s going to be the difference in winning more matches. I particularly liked Murray’s willingness to move up into the court and take the ball earlier. However, he has to be more conservative with his challenges in the future — tonight he had 3 wrong challenges in the second set which frustrated him somewhat. All in all, he played very well.


JCF Says:

Shital

“In my math, if Nadal wins at Toronto and reaches semi at Cincy, he will officially surpass Fed, even if Fed wins Cincy, but ATP’s article requires Nadal to reach Final at Cincy to achieve the same. I may have missed something somewhere. I’d appreciate if somebody explains that to me (JCF, Daniel, Ra, Gordo, Noel, Vulcan, Giner, Matt, FoT, SG, Ryan, or whoever).”

Something to add.. you have definately missed something. Because the old points won’t be deducted for another two weeks, if Fed wins Cincy, he will gain 500 points on top of last year’s 500. He will lose 500 just before the Olympics. So he has a buffer that prevents him from losing his ranking prematurely due to bad play. In a normal year, he’d be gone.

Doing some further maths, assuming Rafa wins Toronto, if Fed makes the final of Cincy, he will hang onto #1, even if Rafa wins the title. But if Rafa wins the title, and Fed only makes the SF, then they will be joint #1.

Bottom line: As long as Fed makes the final of Cincy, he cannot lose his ranking no matter what. At least for another two weeks.

It’s a matter of time though.

What I would like to see happen is for both Rafa and Fed to have equal points. That will be interesting. I wonder how they will seed them in the next tournament? Will they both be listed as rank 1? I would assume Fed is still seeded 1.

In any case, Fed may be protected by delayed points removal and a chance to get free points in Beijing, but it won’t last forever.


Kroll Says:

rjnick Says:

“And Rafa is well known for his superstitious quirks, and it might just be that he doesn’t want to jinx it (as someone else posted earlier, a lesson Djokovic has since learned).”

Please….. Rafa is always extremely conservative in playing himself up and its not like he’s being different as far as proclaiming his superiority is concerned. That is partly because he’s a ridiculously grounded kid and partly because of some stupid good manners conditioning that he’s got from his uncle. Its annoying sometimes (as i ve said before) because its often dishonest, trite and offers no insights into what he’s thinking which make reading his interviws tiresome. He never ever criticises Fed (even though Fed has has done the reverse a few times) or any other player unless he’s being righteous so there….


JCF Says:

Great detective skills Inspector Von. No one seems to fool you. Maybe the site should just require login to post comments? That would stop people like Joker.

Anyway, I just wanted to say again how exciting the state of men’s tennis is right now. We may see shared #1 for the first time I’m aware of, and the #1 ranking will go back and forth week by week. This will make the two even more competitive, and maybe enter more tournaments to outdo the other. This will also motivate Djokovic to climb even higher to catch them.

You have to admit though, if Fed was at his 2006 best, Rafa would not be in the conversation for #1. However, Fed is entering the twilight phase of his career, so it’s unlikely he’ll regain that kind of dominance again.

Will the Olympics points be counted as one of the “Best 5 others”?


JCF Says:

Kroll Says:

“What a brilliant match, much closer than the score reflected for sure. I was very impressed by Murray’s performance and the character he showed, especially the two excellent shots he hit to save the match points. Rafa was pretty good too though I think he was patchy at times with the peak being his choke while facing breakpoints in the second set to double fault.
And inspite of the apparent flaws in his game as far as hardcourts are concerned, namely the high backlift on the forehand and the topspin, he’s actually made up for them somewhat by playing really really deep. Though I feel that the hardcourts here offer a little more bounce than USO so its hard to say what will happen at the slam.”

Murray had excellent game. He has big weapons, off both wings. He punished Rafa’s first serves a lot. He was hitting lots of winners from all over the court. But Rafa’s strategy was to keep inviting Murray to go for big forehands, because he knew he wouldn’t be able to keep it up. This worked great in the tie breaker. Murray hit 40 errors as opposed to 16 from Rafa, but also more winners. That’s the kind of stats you come to expect from big hitters who like to pull the trigger a lot.

Rafa played some excellent drop shots throughout the match. He disguised them well. Murray played some great ones himself.

Overall, I’d say it was a quality match. I was watching the feed from Mary’s link which cut out mid way in the second set and when I reconnected to it, it was over.


Kroll Says:

Von, ur full of surprises. Good work in tracing the sockpuppets, and they Are annoying no doubt.But you do have time on your hands, didnt you say you were a grad student of some kind? :)


Von Says:

JCF:

Are you making fun of me? I dislike these phoney poster names. My point being, if someone has something to say, then say it openly. Have the courgage of their convictions; there shouldn’t be a need to hide behind a false identity; it places the person that’s being addressed at a disadvantage.

I answered your post concerning my favorite player on the other thread.


JCF Says:

“As for the math — the ATP site says that no change in rankings will take place before the Olympics. The scheduling means that the 2007 Canada and Cincinnati results won’t come off until just before the Games begin. So for 2 weeks players will have 2 Masters events count — I think it’s a quirk that counts all Masters events, even when there’s 2 more than there should be. So Rafa could clinch it in Cincinnati, but it won’t actually show up until right before Beijing.”

Oh I getcha. I didn’t know that.

That means my math was wrong. Fed gets protected status for 2 weeks. What this does still mean however is that if Rafa wins Toronto, then loses his first match at Cincy, and Fed defends Cincy title, then when the Olympics comes, they will both have equal points and be joint #1…

That means Fed MUST defend his title in order to avoid losing his ranking when Beijing begins. And if I’m not mistaken, if Rafa wins a single match at Cincy, he will be #1 (just before Beijing). This is assuming he beats Kiefer on Sunday to win Toronto. It’s hard to see why he won’t, but nothing is a certainty in tennis.


Kroll Says:

JCF
“Murray hit 40 errors as opposed to 16 from Rafa, but also more winners.”

Those numbers are misleading by all accounts. Murray hit loads of great winners, no doubt, but you have to wonder about That kind of disparity. And because Rafa doesn’t hit as flat as Murray, he ends up with less number of clear winners. In fact there are loads of points where Murray just managed to reach the ball though it was obvious that he had absolutely no chance to hit it back. Those technically count as unforced errors on Murray’s part but its seriously misplaced terminology.


Von Says:

Kroll:

“Von, ur full of surprises. Good work in tracing the sockpuppets, and they Are annoying no doubt.”

Thanks, and yes they are annoying. I dislike the treachery. With regard to time, I do a lot of legal research on the computer (thank God for the legal data bases) and take self-imposed down time breaks which I devote to posting and reading comments. My eyes are trained to pick up similarities and out of the ordinary things. Call it a job requirement/hazard and/or conditioning. :)


JCF Says:

I made the same mistake as the other day again… I incorrectly assumed Fed won Canada last year. It was only a final he made. Everything I said above was a confusing waste of time.

It didn’t sound right, so I double checked the numbers.

Pre-Toronto:
Fed: 6600
Rafa: 5830

Post-Toronto (IF Rafa wins title):
Fed: 6600+5-350 = 6255
Rafa: 5830+500-225 = 6105

The difference is 150 points as you guys calculated. That is very surmountable at Cincy. If Fed only makes a final and doesn’t win the title, he will lose 150, even if Rafa loses his first match. Which means they share the same number of points. If Rafa makes the SF, he will be #1 regardless of what Fed does. So you were right all along Shital. Sorry I wasted people’s time.

I don’t know why I kept thinking Fed won both Canada and Cincy last year…

Conclusion: Fed must win the title. If he doesn’t, then at best he will have to share his ranking. If Fed doesn’t win the title, Rafa will take his ranking for himself by winning 1 match. If Rafa wants to gain the ranking by his own hands without Federer ‘helping’ him, he needs to make the SF.


jane Says:

Von,

I can’t believe that; I had to scroll up to see what JCF and Kroll were talking about. I really liked Noel’s posts so am shocked. It does seem to be the same style though. Weird – why bother?! Sheesh.

Ain’t no flies on you!


JCF Says:

“In fact there are loads of points where Murray just managed to reach the ball though it was obvious that he had absolutely no chance to hit it back. Those technically count as unforced errors on Murray’s part but its seriously misplaced terminology.”

I believe those count as forced errors, or maybe winners, depending on the broadcast. A service winner (an unreturnable serve that the opponent got their racquet on) is not counted as an error or an ace, but as a winner, even if it barely missed the line.

Unforced is when you’re in position to play the shot but you miss it. That’s your own fault. When you’re on the stretch, it’s a forced error.

I think Murray hit 26 winners to 40 UE. And Nadal was 10 to 16. I agree that it doesn’t reflect the quality of the match though. Murray played great. He deserved to win one set at least.


Von Says:

jane:

“It does seem to be the same style though. Weird – why bother?! Sheesh.

There’s no denying that both posts came from the same computer under different post names, but as you can see when he copied his previous post, he also copied the name he had used on that post prior to this evening. That’s what made me do a double take. That kind of game playing just upsets me and leaves me wondering “why”. I’m like JCF says, it tortures me.

Please explain: “Ain’t no flies on you!” I’m not very hip to slangs.


Kroll Says:

JCF
Well I still disagree. Usually its obvious from watching a match if someone lost because of high number of unforced errors or whatever. I mean this match was pretty balanced and it never seemed that Murray was particularly error-prone. UEs in general are a pretty crazy gray area as the following article clearly indicates.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2007-07-15-unforced-errors_N.htm

Excerpt :

Informed he had committed 54 unforced errors in a loss in the Sony Ericsson Open in March, Roger Federer begged to differ. The numbers, complained the Swiss No. 1, didn’t come close to capturing reality “because the statistics guys have no clue what an unforced error is,” he said. “I had only about half that.”

No. 4 Andy Roddick says, “It’s subjective, so therefore you know certain places the stats are a little off and other places you’re going to look like a superhero.”


JCF Says:

“The loss also means no Djokovic-Nadal semifinal. I didn’t talk much about this semifinal possibility in my earlier posts because I just didn’t think it would happen. On paper it was hard at least for me not to see it, but in some ways I’m not so sure the players wanted it or were ready for such stern test this early in the hard court season. I almost got the sense that maybe Novak didn’t want to run into Rafa here. And vice-versa, had Novak won last night maybe Rafa would have taken Gasquet a little lighter. Maybe. Just a feeling I had, it’s neither here nor there.”

Sean, Rafa knows how close he is to #1. He isn’t going to relent for any reason.

“Rafa was pretty good too though I think he was patchy at times with the peak being his choke while facing breakpoints in the second set to double fault.”

He lost concentration at that point because he got called for Time Violation on break point. It threw him off and bothered him. His first serve missed by a big margin, and it was still on his mind for the second.

He takes longer so he can calm his nerves when he faces break points or when he holds set points. He wasn’t expecting a violation, and he was upset when he got it.

“Though I feel that the hardcourts here offer a little more bounce than USO so its hard to say what will happen at the slam.”

I can totally see people saying that the USO’s bounce was made higher than it was last year if Rafa should go deep in that tournament.

Please. The bounce is higher for both players. Take the ball earlier and you will nullify his weapon. Why isn’t anyone commenting that the pace of Toronto’s court has been slowed down too? And that the concrete was made softer so that his knees won’t feel the pain as much.


Daniel Says:

rjnick

You are right. A chane in rankings will only happen on August 18th as the ATP announced earlier.

Shital, you are right, too. If Nadal make semis in Cincy even with fed winning he will be n. 1 on August 18th. It will be weird to know Nadal as n. 1 but not seeing it officially for twi weeks. Fed will be able to say he is still number one two more weeks. :)

But, we Fed fans still have a shot (hope). I will put a scenarium, possible but even I think a slim one:

If Fed wins Cincy and Nadal make quarters (someone mention before that he doesnt do well there) they will go to Olympics:

Fed – 6255 points
Nadal – 6105 points

In Beijing Fed wins it and Nadal doesn’t do well again or Fed makes 200 poinst more than Nadal. They will be going to the US open:

Fed – 6455 points (Fed with 200 more than Nadal)
Nadal – 6105 points

In US Open, Fed wins it and Nadal improve making semis, they will be:

Fed – 6455 pts
Nadal – 6405 pts

Fed still numebr one after US Open!

My points is, if Fed reproduces last years results and manages to make 200 more points than Nadal in Olympics (I don’t have the ATP points for Beijing, if someone have it show me to accurate my calculations), assuming that Nadal will have a better run in Cincy (but not beyond quarters) he can still be official number one!


jane Says:

Von,

I have had a number of conversations with “Noel” who seemed really nice; I find it shocking that she or he would do something deceitful like that. Why not just be forthright, as you said in your response to JCF.

I thought “ain’t no flies on you” meant smart, nothing gets by you; if there was a fly on you, you’d be onto and swat it or some such. It’s a saying my mother-in-law uses when my son does something smart, or catches on to something. But maybe I (via her) am using it wrong.

I meant it as a compliment to your legal eagle eyes.


Daniel Says:

Sorry to all I just find a mistake. Disconsider the above one, this is the valid one:

But, we Fed fans still have a shot (hope). I will put a scenarium, possible but even I think a slim one:

If Nadal wins tomorrow they will be:

Fed – 6255 pts
Nadal – 6105 pts

If Fed wins Cincy and Nadal make quarters (someone mention before that he doesnt do well there) they will go to Olympics:

Fed – 6255 points
Nadal – 6225 points

Fed still number one after Cincy.

In Beijing Fed wins it and Nadal doesn’t do well again or Fed makes 300 poinst more than Nadal. They will be going to the US open:

Fed – 6555 points (Fed with 300 more than Nadal)
Nadal – 6225 points

In US Open, Fed wins it and Nadal improve making semis, they will be:

Fed – 6555 pts
Nadal – 6525 pts

Fed still numebr one after US Open!

My points is, if Fed reproduces last years results and manages to make 200 more points than Nadal in Olympics (I don’t have the ATP points for Beijing, if someone have it show me to accurate my calculations), assuming that Nadal will have a better run in Cincy (but not beyond quarters) he can still be official number one!


Shital Green Says:

JCF,

Ref: “I was watching the feed from Mary’s link which cut out mid way in the second set and when I reconnected to it, it was over.”

Here a couple of links. You may want to bookmark them so that you will not miss matches in the future:
(1) http://myp2p.eu/competition.php?competitionid=&part=sports&discipline=tennis

(2) http://www.channelsurfing.net/

(3) http://sopcast.com/
The 3rd one requires an installation (it has been proven safe to me for over 2 years now). Then, look for (or search for if not listed) Starsports.


JCF Says:

Kroll, I agree that there are gray errors when it comes to deciding whether an error is forced or unforced. Commentators point out that they disagree with the stats as well. It would be nice if the stats revealed forced errors and service winners as well for more detail. I’m not sure if the ‘winners’ counts aces or not.

If they were indeed forced errors, then they are really defacto ‘winners’ from Rafa’s racquet, which would suggest that Rafa played better than the stats showed as well. The match analysis that showed ball placement did reveal that Nadal hit more balls to Murray’s forehand than backhand, which is not what he would normally do. He likes hitting forehands to the opponent’s backhand, but was willing to switch it around because Murray’s backhand today was more steady and hitting fewer ‘errors’ (whatever they are) than the forehand.

Jane,

“I can’t believe that; I had to scroll up to see what JCF and Kroll were talking about.”

What was I (and Kroll) talking about that you’re referring to?

Von,

I’m not sure what’s gotten into you today.

“Are you making fun of me?”

No I’m not making fun of you. I was being sincere, not sarcastic.

“I’m like JCF says, it tortures me.”

I don’t recall saying it tortures you or anything to that effect. I was merely saying you’re a great detective and no one fools you. I meant that as a compliment, not a jibe. I don’t know how much time you spend ‘studying’ these comments, but I’m amazed/impressed nonetheless by your astuteness.

Peace!


Kroll Says:

JCF
“I can totally see people saying that the USO’s bounce was made higher than it was last year if Rafa should go deep in that tournament.

Please. The bounce is higher for both players. Take the ball earlier and you will nullify his weapon. Why isn’t anyone commenting that the pace of Toronto’s court has been slowed down too? And that the concrete was made softer so that his knees won’t feel the pain as much.”

Ok the last one is an unfair remark. I wasnt commenting on the bounce because of the succes Rafa is enjoying, thats ridiculous. You see, the good lord has been kind enough to give me eyes….so I Look! The bounce was surely higher here than I remember at USO last year. Besides the argument that the bounce is same for both players (obvious) is valueless and for the purpose of the present discussion, specious. Rafa Uses the bounce very effectively because of the top spin, its a Weapon not just some trivial fact. Clay and grass (to a lesser extent) favor him in that respect and hardcourts generally dont (even toronto doesent really). And I personally think (as I said earlier) he has made up for that by playing his forehands really deep, very close to the opponents baseline. This means that even though the top spun forehand gives the opponent more time along the baseline, they Have to reposition themselves perpendicular to it so that seems to make up for it. And if there is some bounce, all the better. Further, the fact that he uses the top spin actually allows him to do this (since the ball dips like crazy) and keep the UE count on the deep forehand pretty low.


jane Says:

JCF – You were both telling Von she’s a good detective or inspector or something; I didn’t know what you were talking about so I scrolled up to Von’s comments and discovered that Noel, aka “Roddick is a saint,” who wrote a post on another thread earlier today, had been outed by Von. Very surprising revelation, that.


JCF Says:

“But, we Fed fans still have a shot (hope). I will put a scenarium, possible but even I think a slim one:

If Fed wins Cincy and Nadal make quarters (someone mention before that he doesnt do well there) they will go to Olympics:

Fed – 6255 points
Nadal – 6105 points”

Not quite. Nadal has only 5 points to defend in Cincy (which he will get just by showing up). If he makes the QF, he will gain 120 points on top of last year’s 5. That would leave Nadal with 6225, which is equal to what Fed would have if he wins Cincy.

Your chances will look a lot better if Kiefer beats Nadal tomorrow.

“My points is, if Fed reproduces last years results and manages to make 200 more points than Nadal in Olympics (I don’t have the ATP points for Beijing, if someone have it show me to accurate my calculations), assuming that Nadal will have a better run in Cincy (but not beyond quarters) he can still be official number one!”

All this will do is delay the inevitable. The onus is on Fed to perform right now. Rafa doesn’t have the pressure, as he doesn’t have many points to defend. As I said in another post, Rafa only needs one of two things to happen: Play well, or for Fed to not play well. Fed needs for both of those things to not happen.

I am not even confident that Fed will defend his title. The entire burden will be on his shoulders to bear regardless.

Even if he holds onto #1, it won’t be for long. I can picture a back and forth, and both players will be bringing the best out of each other even when they don’t get to meet. Fed will be extra motivated for sure, which is a good thing.


jane Says:

And Rafa’s spin keep the UE count low also because he clears the net by so much too, unlike Murray or Djoko who drive their forehands and thus have a stronger chance of not clearing the net, as we saw a few times tonight.

Rafa has to be one of the best players of making adjustments to his game to continue to improve on every surface, in every capacity. It was great to see Murray has also been doing his homework – figuring what to do against each player & staying both aggressive and positive.


Daniel Says:

The way Nadal manages to win against Gasquet and Murray is impressive. The way they both play they would had beat almost everybody on tour and even on hardcourt Nadal won it.

Tomorrow match is over already unless Kiefer do magic and find a way to stop Nadal’s 28 winning streak!


JCF Says:

Kroll, hard courts were always meant to have higher bounce than grass.

Rafa is not the only one that uses topspin. Sure, his heavy forehand will be even more potent, but when his opponents use topspin back at him, they will also be more potent than before. The advantage he has on ‘spin’ is proportionate to before.

Only this year have I learnt that hard courts are the fastest surface and with the lowest bounce. It was news to me until Wimbledon. Maybe the differences between surfaces aren’t that big after all? /shrug


Von Says:

JCF:

Von,
I’m not sure what’s gotten into you today.

“Are you making fun of me?”

No I’m not making fun of you. I was being sincere, not sarcastic.

I was being facetious. It was in response to your designation: Inspector Von. I appreciated your compliment, but didn’t want to draw too much attention to it. Thanks.

“I’m like JCF says, it tortures me.”

I’m not saying that you say anything is torturing me, I was referring to when you wanted to know the gender of another poster, I told you that I know, but I’m not gonna tell. Your response was something along the lines of: Von, you torture me. Don’t you remember that? I was just being playful. I’m not at all offended by anything you say. I think you have a fun personality and I like to bring it out. Take it as a compliment, because I’m not one for trading jokes easily. I have to warm up to a person, and I don’t hand out insincere compliments either. You’re A OK in my books and I enjoy the camaraderie.

“I don’t know how much time you spend ’studying’ these comments, but I’m amazed/impressed nonetheless by your astuteness.”

I don’t spend time studying the comments, I simply read them, but as I mentioned before, I have a good memory and I remember seeing things I read. It flashes into my mind. As i’v stated before, I’m trained to look for things that someone else would not notice.

PAX!! :)


Tia08 Says:

Roger doesn’t get 5 points for Toronto, like you guys have calculated, he gets 35. His loss to Simon was a second round tie, not a first :)


Kroll Says:

JCF
“Kroll, hard courts were always meant to have
higher bounce than grass.”

Normally yes, but topspin changes the equation. So on a flat rigid surface(like USO) the spin produces no effect in the bounce (Its a relatively simple dynamic problem) so someone like Rafa has No advantage.
On the AO, which is a synthetic hard court, the spin produces no effect on the bounces And at the same time, since the surface is a little pliant, it actually Kills the bounce.
Clay is more complicated because we have to consider the dynamics of sand too (which at high pressures of the ball colliding against the surface behaves like a fluid) so I have no physical explanation for this. But we all can see the bounce that Rafa’s spin generates so thats an obvious observation.
Grass is again complicated because how the hell do you understand what grass does to collisions without some complex modelling? However, I differ a lot from your own observations, and I feel that top spin actually Adds to the bounce on grass (in variance with hardcourts where it produces no effect)


Von Says:

jane: “ain’t no flies on you”

Thanks for the explanation. In a way it makes sense, what your Mom-in-law means, I suppose a fly can’t stay put on someone who is fast to swat it. Funny. :) So your son is a smart one, eh? They’re cute when they’re trying to outwit us.


Von Says:

My compliments to the mathematicians and statisticians. I’m a dummy where the points are concerned. I’ll just wait until after Cincy to see what happens. I am befuddled!


zola Says:

Vamos Rafa, great win over Andy Murray.

but what a match. Amdy was up there with him. Both Andy and Gasquet have improved a lot. Gasquet in his mentality and Murray both mentally and physically and also gamewise. He is very patient. Reaches to evry ball and that killer backhand. I am really glad Rafa won!

Daniel,
I think the difference between our calculations and the ATP ( 150 and 300) comes from the fact that the ranking points will not come off until two weeks after the tournament. So my guess is these points will be added without the 07 points being off.

Also for anyone intersted in Olympic ranking points, look at this article by Kamakshi Tandon. There sha has all these points:

http://www.tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=140332

I hope Rafa can win tomorrow. Some say it is a given. But he lost very easily against Davydenko in Miami. That should not be reapeated here Rafa! rest well and play great tomorrow! Vamos!


Kroll Says:

Jane Says:

“And Rafa’s spin keep the UE count low also because he clears the net by so much too”

True that. Thats perhaps as significant as the ball dipping.


JCF Says:

“If Fed wins Cincy and Nadal make quarters (someone mention before that he doesnt do well there) they will go to Olympics:

Fed – 6255 points
Nadal – 6225 points”

Ok, that sounds better. You corrected me slightly also. Not my day… 30 pts = 5 race points = opening round loss at an AMS is the difference between their points.

Nonetheless, this is indeed possible. If I was to put money on it though, my money would be on Fed NOT defending his title (the way he’s been going), which changes the complexion of the scenario. The ATP will make a big deal out of this if Rafa makes the QF. They will make a headline to the effect of “Nadal one match away from clinching World No.1″, which will rattle Fed a bit if he reads it. The pressure has never been greater than it is now.

Based on history, it wouldn’t surprise me if Rafa and Djoko lost early once again in Cincy, but it’s still not going to be an easy task for Fed to defend this title. There are a number of players in his half of the draw that have potential to beat him. I would not have said the same of these players a year ago.

I’ll be keeping an eye on any pre-match interview Fed does at Cincy. What he said this time backfired on him. I’m sure he will choose more modest words in the next one (“I’m still No.1″ or “I want to win this title.” is probably not the best thing to say.)

One thing that should be noted is that history isn’t the best indicator of what will happen. History doesn’t always repeat. You can analyze anything in a way to fit the point you’re trying to make, but there is a first time for anything. So even if you have a horrid record at some tournament, you can still win it. Players can and have done this before. Djokovic was 4-0 or 3-0 against Murray until yesterday. Fed had defeated Rafa in all Wimbledon finals they played until this month. The trend would have been for him to do so again. I am trying to put my finger on what it is about Cincinatti that makes it hard for Rafa and Djokovic to do well at, and what the difference is between that tournament and Canada. I’m coming up short. It could just be coincidence that they happen to have had their inevitable bad runs (they come at least once a year) at Cincy the last few years..


zola Says:

Roddick is a saint,
sorry, I just saw your post. You are right. The ranking points stay there for 52 weeks and in this case it makes things a bit complicated.

I love the Game,
thanks. yes, I think Rafa is very sincere in his humility.


Kroll Says:

zola
“thanks. yes, I think Rafa is very sincere in his humility.”

Again I disagree. I think he is conditioned to be dishonest (I might well have defined ‘humility’). The real him is the fighter and competitor we see on court, not the one who speaks off it. I think the latter is more about family upbringing or whatever. Truth is, personally I dont view ‘nice’ or ‘humble’ as qualities in people because I think they are superficial in general. Though I understand that as a role model for many and being in the public view, these are rather essential qualities. These appeal to people en masse and thats often more important than being honest and witty, which can be oft misinterpreted for vanity and brashness.


JCF Says:

Kroll, I will take your word for it and leave it at that.

“Roger doesn’t get 5 points for Toronto, like you guys have calculated, he gets 35. His loss to Simon was a second round tie, not a first :)”

Oops! I was even aware than it was 2nd round, but for some reason was using 5 pts still. I confuse race and ranking points when the numbers are low. That does change things however, and none of us picked that up. The reason I assume it is 5 and not 35 is because Rafa got only 5 pts for Cincinatti and that too was opening round. They’ve changed it for this year. Last year, Rafa got 5 pts for R32 (2nd round). But according to the Cincy profile page on ATP, R64 is 5 pts and R32 is 35 pts. Cincy and Toronto have the same field size. Did they double the draw size this year compared to last year?

Fed would have 6285 going into Cincy instead of 6255.

Doing the math for what I hope to be the last time…

It won’t change the scenario. If Rafa makes the SF, he is still going to take #1.

Von,

“’m not saying that you say anything is torturing me, I was referring to when you wanted to know the gender of another poster, I told you that I know, but I’m not gonna tell. Your response was something along the lines of: Von, you torture me. Don’t you remember that?”

Ah! Don’t you remember that my memory sucks? :P

“I was just being playful. I’m not at all offended by anything you say. I think you have a fun personality and I like to bring it out. Take it as a compliment, because I’m not one for trading jokes easily. I have to warm up to a person, and I don’t hand out insincere compliments either. You’re A OK in my books and I enjoy the camaraderie.”

Thanks! Great to hear. I thought I might have pressed the wrong buttons or something…

“but as I mentioned before, I have a good memory and I remember seeing things I read. It flashes into my mind.”

Yes, and it’s quite creepy I might add. If I was married to you, I think I’d have to double check everything I did and said for the day (and keep notes) just to make sure I’ve covered my tracks! Only joking. But still, the very thought you might remember every embarrassing thing and little detail…


JCF Says:

Posting this as a separate comment because this blog seems to reject messages that have URLs in them (“awaiting moderation”).

Rafa’s ranking breakdown:

http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/pointsbreakdown.asp?player=N409

Notice that it says Rome, Cincy: R32 – 5 pts.

Canada profile page:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/profile/421.asp

Cincy profile page:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/profile/422.asp

As you can see in the column on the right, you get 5 pts for R64, and 35 pts for R32. Something is definately up. Rafa should then have 35 pts for his R32 losses then? They haven’t messed with the numbers for higher rounds so it’s not like they overhauled the points.

That’s why we all got it wrong. It’s news to me that you get 35 points for a first up loss (Bye in opening round).

My guess is that the profile page is wrong.

Rafa still got 5 pts for R32 this year in Rome.

Yep, I was right.

Rome profile page:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/profile/416.asp

R64 is worth 5 pts, R32 is worth 35. Rafa lost in R32 but only got 5 for it. Or maybe the system is made so that if you have a bye in the first round, you still get points as though your second round is a first round match.

This leads me to believe that Federer will only be getting 5 pts for his loss in Toronto, not 35.


Shital Green Says:

Daniel,
Ref: “But, we Fed fans still have a shot (hope).”

Do not lose your hope even if Fed loses No. 1 position before US Open, which is very likely. I am sure he is already figuring out how to regain (without officially losing in the ATP board). First he has to win Cincy; then, Olympics (winner: 400 points); then, US Open; then, Madrid, Basel, Paris, and TMC, in that order. One at a time. I think he may be concerned more about maintaining year end No. 1 position than about temporarily losing it to Rafa. But once Rafa gets there, it will not be easy for Fed to oust him. So, Fed should be working to stop early while there is time. Toronto loss was costly for him. In any case, the battle for the No. 1 will be bloody.


JCF Says:

Kroll,

“Again I disagree. I think he is conditioned to be dishonest (I might well have defined ‘humility’). The real him is the fighter and competitor we see on court, not the one who speaks off it. I think the latter is more about family upbringing or whatever. Truth is, personally I dont view ‘nice’ or ‘humble’ as qualities in people because I think they are superficial in general. Though I understand that as a role model for many and being in the public view, these are rather essential qualities. These appeal to people en masse and thats often more important than being honest and witty, which can be oft misinterpreted for vanity and brashness.”

There is honest, and then there is rude (or blunt).

Do you tell a fat man that they are fat, or an ugly person that they are ugly if asked for an opinion? To say otherwise would be insincere or dishonest, but I don’t think even you would be candid here. When your wife asks, ‘how do I look in this dress?’ while you’re preoccupied with something….

You have to use some discretion. Rafa just chooses to offend as few people as he can, unless it’s some joke that he didn’t understand was in bad taste in another culture for instance. As a result, he doesn’t draw fire from the media for his comments, and comes off as ‘classy’ to them. Djokovic would be someone the media tries to bait. Fed is a guy who is generally gracious but does lapse into candor at times, and the media pounces on it. I’d hate to be him, as I’d have to avoid reading all news entirely.

Humility vs sincerity. There is merit to each, and at different times. Rafa just takes it to an extreme. I would probably be somewhere in between.


Kroll Says:

JCF
I agree completely, what I said was trivial and of no value whatsoever. What zola said seemed so soupy at the time, I felt the urge to pick at her. As I ve said before, my natural nastiness surfacing. I should perhaps delve into the etymology of “Kroll”, but then again it might be obvious.

I suppose I should top this all off with “No offense intended really” :)


JCF Says:

“I was being facetious. It was in response to your designation: Inspector Von. I appreciated your compliment, but didn’t want to draw too much attention to it. Thanks.”

Sorry again Von. I thought you misunderstood me, but it was *I* who misunderstood *you*.

“I’m not saying that you say anything is torturing me, I was referring to when you wanted to know the gender of another poster, I told you that I know, but I’m not gonna tell.”

But now that you’ve exposed Noel for the two-faced enigma that s/he is, you mind spilling the beans on his/her gender? Not like you care anymore, right? Or rather, not like you’re sure anymore?

How long have you been talking to this person back and forth? Admittedly I hadn’t always taken as much interest in the forum as I have post-RG this year.


Von Says:

JCF:

“I am trying to put my finger on what it is about Cincinatti that makes it hard for Rafa and Djokovic to do well at, and what the difference is between that tournament and Canada. I’m coming up short. It could just be coincidence that they happen to have had their inevitable bad runs (they come at least once a year) at Cincy the last few years..”

For one thing it’s the weather. It’s hot as hell and very humid. The heat from the court burns into the players feet, similar to OZ. It’s agonizing for the Europeans especially coming from Canada where it’s cooler weather and not as humid. Roddick can handle that heat because he lives in Texas where it’s very hot and humid also. Blake, Fish and the bryans live in Florida, my home state, and it’s hit as hell also, so it’s easy for them. This is one of the reasons Federer practices in Dubai before coming to the American hardcourt season. Dubai is hot and he is able to acclimatize himself slowly to the heat.

On another topic:

“I thought I might have pressed the wrong buttons or something…”

If you did, I would let you know forthwith — my mouth is not lazy and I don’t believe in allowing things to fester. I’m very direct and upfront.

“Yes, and it’s quite creepy I might add. If I was married to you, I think I’d have to double check everything I did and said for the day (and keep notes) just to make sure I’ve covered my tracks! Only joking. But still, the very thought you might remember every embarrassing thing and little detail…”

Hey, hang on now — we’ve not yet had our first date, or held hands, and you’re into us already being married? :) That’s a new one; or will I be a mail order bride? And what awful things will you be doing which would entail your having to cover your tracks. I don’t know about you JCF, now you have me wondering, and I’m going to have to think about the marriage. :) I hope you know I’m just kidding around and exchanging light banter. :) This laugh’s on me.


Von Says:

JCF:

“But now that you’ve exposed Noel for the two-faced enigma that s/he is, you mind spilling the beans on his/her gender? Not like you care anymore, right? Or rather, not like you’re sure anymore?

Gender: Male.

“How long have you been talking to this person back and forth? Admittedly I hadn’t always taken as much interest in the forum as I have post-RG this year.”

He began posting around Monte Carlo off and on. Not consiistently, but within the last 2-3 weeks he’s posted a lot more.

OK Inspector Clusot (?) or Inspector Gadget, is this enough to keep you from being tortured? I spilled the beans.


addie Says:

JCF, re the #1 ranking:

If I’m not wrong the points from Canada last year should drop off a week before last year’s Cincy points…so there could be a change after next week’s tourny. By my math if Nadal wins the title next week he will be No. 1 no matter what Fed does, unless Fed makes the final in which case they’d be tied.


jane Says:

Kroll – I looked up “kroll” and found only “krill” which is a small plant eaten by whales – doesn’t sound very nasty, so clearly I’m following the wrong etymological path.

Von – the son, yep, he’s bright – “exceeds grade expectations” in most subjects on his grade 1 report card. Not like it’s hard or anything, but he’s doing it all in French, not our first language, which he absorbed like a sponge and likes to use to befuddle his parents.

—-

One note on Toronto vs. Cincy – I think the weather is a factor, although Toronto and Montreal can both be very humid places, but not as hot as Cincy. I remember last year Rafa retired because he was “dizzy” – maybe he was just sick, but maybe the players aren’t used to the heat / humidity combination, especially following Canada which would be cooler in general. (But we don’t live in igloos up here.)


JCF Says:

Kroll says:

“JCF
I agree completely, what I said was trivial and of no value whatsoever. What zola said seemed so soupy at the time, I felt the urge to pick at her. As I ve said before, my natural nastiness surfacing. I should perhaps delve into the etymology of “Kroll”, but then again it might be obvious.

I suppose I should top this all off with “No offense intended really” :)”

None taken Kroll. I should have known, since you’re not that kind of person. You’re one of the more pleasant chaps I had exchanges with. I failed to connect the dots, and I failed to connect them with Von also.

I accept your analysis of the surfaces and bounces. You know more than I do. It does appear peculiar to me that the tennis gods seem to keep favoring Nadal. What’s he done to deserve it I wonder. Maybe it’s his humility…

“OK Inspector Clusot (?) or Inspector Gadget, is this enough to keep you from being tortured? I spilled the beans.”

I’m disappointed actually. I couldn’t figure it out from reading his posts. And I was expecting Noel to be a girl. I’m bad at reading people.

“If I’m not wrong the points from Canada last year should drop off a week before last year’s Cincy points…so there could be a change after next week’s tourny. By my math if Nadal wins the title next week he will be No. 1 no matter what Fed does, unless Fed makes the final in which case they’d be tied.”

I presume you mean Toronto. The math is so muddy now that I don’t want to revisit it. It hurts. I don’t know how many points Fed will get, be it 5 or 35 from Toronto. I think it is 5 and that the tournament profile page on the ATP is wrong. According to that page Rome should have given 35 pts for R32, but Rafa only got 5 pts for it. It looks like a mistake.

I posted a more detailed analysis but it had URLs in it, and t-x ate up my message because they don’t like URLs.

Again, any pre-match interviews Fed does in Cincy will be very interesting indeed. I want to know what his reaction will be when reminded once again how narrow the gap is now, and that he for the first time risks losing his ranking within one tournament. The closest he’s gotten before would have required more than one tournament to lose it. Will he once again play the ‘all is well’ card?

I remember when Rafa was quizzed about how close Djokovic was closing in on his #2 ranking, his answer was that “it’s very likely I will lose the #2 ranking to him by Wimbledon, or even by Roland Garros. He has done well and I have a lot of points to defend and he has many he can pick up. It’s ok, he is deserving of it, and I will have to work harder.”

He wasn’t expecting to defend his Wimbledon points, and it was so narrow between them that Djokovic could picked up enough points in the clay season to become #2 even if Rafa defended everything. Maybe it was good karma, because everything went the reverse of what Rafa feared it would be, and he’s closer to #1 than #3 now.

Roger’s reaction will be the same. He won’t begrudge it, he will bounce back and push himself even harder to gain it back.


Shital Green Says:

JCF,
It is pronounced as “sh” as in “shirt”; “i” as in “ice”; “tal” as in “tall” = makeshift phonetic transcription /shia-tall or Shy-tall/.

I appreciate your math efforts. We all agree about the time when Rafa takes the mantle. That is all matters. In a sense, Rafa will be mathematically No. 1 without appearing on the board in one of the scenarios that you discussed.

Technically, ATP is right about the 300 points in its own weird way. I had overlooked the 5th International, i.e. Rotterdam in Rafa’s case. Von’s fake friend had done the right math: “If you add 500 points to Rafa’s existing tally of 5830 and deduct 25 points from Rafa’s Rotterdam points, he will have 6305 points because he is keeping his 2007 Canada AMS points as well. Fed only gets 5 points for his Canada AMS 2008, and he will have 6605 points, which gives the difference of 300 points that you say ATP is talking about. Fed doesn’t drop any points because he only has four other countable events in his ranking breakdown; therefore, he has ‘room’ to accommodate an additional event without dropping some other event like Rotterdam in Rafa’s case.”


Von Says:

JCF:

Your post with the URLs might appear later. It takes some time for the system to digest the information. I see you didn’t read the humoous post about being a mail order bride.

_________
jane:
That’s super that the little guy is learning everything in French. Also, he’s so smart. my son was a “gited child” in school, but as they bevome older, they don’t want to work as hard. My Godson, who lives in Toronto, is in a program called “French Immersion” whereby he has to speak French from the time he gets on the school bus until he gets back to his home at the end of the school day. At their age everything is easier, especially the computer. it’s part and parcel of their thinking.


matt Says:

Noel explained the maths perfectly:

They will count Canadian Open and Cincinatti twice (’07 and ’08 results) for two weeks, in which they will count as some of the five best results out of GS and MS (yes, I know it is absurd, but that’s how it is) incase your points in these events are high enough to enter in the five-best-not-GS-not-MS category.

Another thing: if you lose in the second round and you’ve won the first round, then you get 35 points.

But, if you lose in the second round and you had BYE in the first round (as top-seeds have) then you only get 5 points.

Talking about the match: great, great match. Murray played very well. He ran well, hit well and did almost everything right.

It’s just that I don’t know what you have to do to beat Nadal right now.

As I see it, it depends on Nadal. If he plays like he is doing lately, he wins.

If he plays bad (as he did in Miami final) then you’ve got a chance.

When Nadal is confident, it is almost imposible to beat him (in any court).

Of course, the situation may change rapidly. One bad loss here and there and your confidence vanishes quickly.

But the thing is that he is winning all his matches: MonteCarlo, Barcelona, (lost in Roma 1st-round due to blisters), Hamburg, RolandGarros, Queens, Wimbledon, and now Toronto), on all
surfaces.

He must feel so confident right now because he knows he is winning on all courts and probably now he really believes in himself more than ever.

Still, he is very, very intelligent, and I bet he’ll lose early deliberately in the Olympics if he wins Toronto and Cincinatti to be fresh at the USOPEN.

Anyway, I don’t see him winning back to back Toronto and Cincinatti. It would be too much (after so many consecutive titles).

I’ve seen them all: Gonzalez (Pancho), Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Ashe, Nastase, Smith, Connors, Vilas, Borg, McEnroe, Gerulaitis, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Cash, Agassi, Courier, Sampras, Rafter,… and I have to say that Nadal is probably the best mind in tennis along with Borg.

He doesn’t have a monster serve, he doesn’t have Sampras’s or Federer’s technique, but he has Borg’s mind. He reminds me a lot of him.

I used to love Pancho, Laver, McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, Rafter….that style of play (Laver and Sampras were more all-round players in fact), but I have to recognize Nadal’s quality as well as I recognized Borg’s quality in the past.


Von Says:

Mat:

“I’ve seen them all: Gonzalez (Pancho), Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Ashe, Nastase, Smith, Connors, Vilas, Borg, McEnroe, Gerulaitis, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Cash, Agassi, Courier, Sampras, Rafter,… and I have to say that Nadal is probably the best mind in tennis along with Borg.”

I envy you being able to see all of those greats in action. You’d be the perfect person to do an analysis era by era, with comparisons of technology, surfaces and the evolution of the sport.

“But the thing is that he is winning all his matches: MonteCarlo, Barcelona, (lost in Roma 1st-round due to blisters), Hamburg, RolandGarros, Queens, Wimbledon, and now Toronto), on all
surfaces.”

Would you say that Nadal is having a break-out year similar to that of Fed’s ’04 run? If so, Nadal’s domination could last for another 2-3 years. We’re in a very fascinating period of tennis, and I’m happy to be a part of it.

On another topic, the commentators were discussing the Toronto court during the Simon/Kiefer match this evening. According to them, the court is nullifying the serves of the big servers. Brad Gilbert felt that the only player whose serve wouldn’t be nullified and prove effective is Ivo Karlovic.

It’s interesting what you state about Sampras having an all-around game. I felt that way too, but most seem to identify him as a serve and volley style player. However, I didn’t see him as such — I loved to watch him go for his shots (groundies) and also jump up to take the ball out of the air. He looked like a bird soaring through the air.


Kroll Says:

matt

Thats a great comment, mirrors my own opinion on Rafa. He’s talented no doubt but he’s certainly not in the league of Fed or many of the greats on that front. He’s a player who seems to have constructed every aspect of his game from scratch.

First, he gets strong enough to have that killer top spin, clearly identifying the role that the shot plays on clay (his first and clearly most natural surface). He then gets fit enough to chase everything down. Each year he gets better on clay and finds more ways of being dominant.

While he becomes the dominant player on clay, he keeps working on his grasscourt game. Plays doubles to improve his volleying, by his own admission, improves his slice, serve and aggression. I mean he has been improving and improving uniformly. The level of determination and tactics he has shown in his tennis career is unbelievable and is second to none. Its actually very inspirational and instructive. In the past I ve heard half-witted Fed fanboys criticizing Rafa for what they think is a victory of strength over talent(which somehow made it unnatural and a travesty apparently) but its really determination and mental strength that they are talking about.

There is a lot of talk about how Rafa is going to physically burn out and his weak knees or similar tosh. But I for one think that if he burns out, it would necessarily be a mental one, like Borg.


matt Says:

Until 1997, Sampras used to stay back with second serves (except when playing on grass) and sometimes even with first serve.

He used to play (in those years and outside of grass) mostly from the baseline and beat Agassi, Courier, Chang, Kafelnikov, Muster, Moyá,…..

It was about 1998 when he improved his second serve (perhaps the best second serve of the history) and started to play serve-and-volley with first and second serve. Also he started to chip-and-charge a lot in the return games.( So he started to play on hardcourt just the way he played on grass).

From 1998 on, given that he played mostly at the net, he started to lose patience when playing from the baseline and made a lot of unforced errors.

One time I read (it is suppose to be Sampras’s words) he adopted this style to shorten the points and safe energy. Given that he has Thalasemia it could be a wise decision.

But then, why he could play so well until 1997 playing longer rallies?

It is not clear to me. (Unless his illness got worst, but I have never read about this posibility)

For me Sampras had a very complete game.

His success at Wimbledon is due to his returns, passhing-shots and mobility as much as it is due to his serve and volley, given that Ivanisevic, Becker, Krajicek, Philippoussis used to have more aces and service winners than Sampras.

Of course mentally he was the best of his era, usually making aces at break-points even with second serves, or playing a point out of his mind almost everytime he needed at most.


Von Says:

Kroll:

“He’s a player who seems to have constructed every aspect of his game from scratch.”

I’ve heard Federer say this of himself in an interview. He mentioned that he would sit and watch old tapes of the players he most admired, copied their shots by practicing for hours until he had perfected them, and added them one by one to his repertoire until he built up a variety of shots. After he felt comfortable with his new shots, he would begin incorporating them in his matches whenever he faced an opponent who was struggling with his game.

___________
Matt:

“One time I read (it is suppose to be Sampras’s words) he adopted this style to shorten the points and safe energy. Given that he has Thalasemia it could be a wise decision.”

I’ve heard Sampras make that statement also. He mentioned that he reverted more to serve and volley because he wanted to keep the points short to save energy. I believe from around the age of 27 the Thalassemia got worse and the physical activity placed a great demand on his energy resources.

I remember before his 2001 final v. Hewitt, when asked by the reporter what strategy he had planned for the final, he answered, keep the points short. He lost the final anyway because Hewitt was able to blow him away with his speed and engaging in long rallies.


matt Says:

Kroll, I totally agree.

Nadal is the opposite of “natural talent” in the sense of Federer, Sampras, McEnroe, Edberg, Evonne Googalong (Oh dear, she was just unique).

But in tennis, “talent” (or finesse, or gifted, or however we call it) doesn’t mean “better”.

Miloslav Mecir, Henri Leconte, Vitas Gerulaitis, Marcelo Ríos…..all of them were extremely gifted, but there were others less gifted who were better tennis players like Borg, Lendl, Wilander, Courier,….

“gifted”, “talent”, “finesse”,….are just words we use to describe some kind of artistry, style of play of a given nature.

But “better” is the one who wins more than the rest, regardless of the way he plays.

Mats Wilander didn’t have any great weapon. His great weapon was that he knew how to beat the best players of the world.

He was extremely intelligent and though I didn’t like his game, I love to watch him because you had to witness how he could defeat the best players of the world on any surface mostly with his head, the way he knew what to do in every situation.

Nadal is that kind of animal. He knows exactly what to do, he is very intelligent.

And that, too, is a kind of talent (just a different type)


zola Says:

matt,
Nadal’s brand of tennis is not classic. You cannot find it in a tennis book. That’s very true. as you say , talent hs different meanings or forms. To me, Rafa is very smart and a very talented tennis player. He just doesn’t play text-book tennis.

On top of that one charachteristic of Rafa’s game is its high intensity and passion and that’s not text book either.

**********
the final starts (no earlier than) 1 pm Toronto time tomorrow, but ESPN will show it at 3 pm Eastern time.

VAmos RAfa, play a great match tomorrow!


I love the Game Says:

Kroll

Whoever said you are an objective nadal fan.
You are not just biased,you are reverse biased


Kroll Says:

I love the Game :

First, kudos on the ‘nickname’: very creative and original, clearly separates you from the rest of us. However, if you chose that to be intentionally pestilential and ponderous, I am ok with that, after all you Are clear about your aims.

Second, “objective fan” is an oxymoron and I claim to be neither objective, nor a Rafa fan. I am ridiculously opinionated on such matters and I dont consider that a bad thing. But I can hardly claim to be a Rafa fan, I like his attitude and his game but I find his off court persona boring, though as JCF elucidated, is not a bad thing.

And
“reverse biased”?
Excuse me if I find myself somewhat linguistically challenged here. Prey elaborate.


Kroll Says:

Von says :

“I’ve heard Federer say this of himself in an interview. ”

A very interesting comment and a very difficult statement to argue against. Surely talent without effort and determination is useless so it comes down to our perception of who is more talented and who has to make up more for the lack thereof.
Perhaps what matt (and I) said on the matter can still be consistent in the light of the above remark?


Ray Says:

Usually you get 35 points if you lose in the second round of a masters but if you had a first round bye you only get first round points if you lose in the second round. From the 3rd round, it’s the same points for everybody.


Voicemale1 Says:

Matt:

Agree with your posts regarding what Nadal’s true talent is: his head. He’s got a First Class Forehand – let’s be fair. But he can figure out ways to win when things aren’t going well. In fact Wilander basically said Nadal is just smarter than most other players out there today.

Sampras lived & died by his serve; Graf & Federer by their forehands, i.e., their money shots. They had enough mental capability to execute their shots optimally, and when their money shots were firing their opponents were generally helpless. But when those shots went awry (and toward the back end of the Sampras & Graf careers those money shots went awry more and more often), they had no real “Plan B”. Nadal’s talent isn’t just his Forehand so much as it is his Point Construction – especially at crunch time like Break Points – and that’s a direct function of Match Playing Intelligence. When you look at the sheer number of Break Points Nadal saves, and how many matches he’s rescued from near oblivion you get the idea of what really matters to STAY at the top of the game for years at a time. Beautiful ball striking is an elective at the top of the game; Match Playing Intelligence is a requirement.

You’re correct about Nadal’s game being a matter of confidence. But that’s true for everyone. Federer today is nothing but a confidence crisis, and his match with Simon is the perfect example of living & dying by his Forehand. It went painfully awry that night, and he lost. When more & more guys ranked below you believe they can beat you, confidence is tougher to come by. Federer’s challenge today is to do what he hasn’t had to do in 4 years and it’s the same one Nadal was faced with 2 years ago: he has some improving to do.


Daniel Says:

You know what occurred to me, another paranoic thouth! That’s part of who I am, thinking in every possible scenarium in a given situation.

Let’s assume Nadal will take number one after nest week (Cincy), but it will only show on August 18th (Canada and Cincy played two weeks later last year).
They go to Olympics and over there Fed wins it and recovers the number one spot. If the Olympics final will be on August 17th (that is the part I don’t know), than the Beijing ATP points will count on August 18th.

My points is Nadal could be numeber one “on hold” for two weeks and in those two weeks (Olympics) Fed can regain the number one spot, which means Nadal will be n. 1 but it won’t show as official on ATP. Wouldn’t that be bizarre?!


Daniel Says:

Sorry for the typos, “thought” and “next”.


matt Says:

Voicemaile1, you expressed it beautifully: “Beautiful ball striking is an elective at the top of the game; Match Playing Intelligence is a requirement”.


JCF Says:

“My points is Nadal could be numeber one “on hold” for two weeks and in those two weeks (Olympics) Fed can regain the number one spot, which means Nadal will be n. 1 but it won’t show as official on ATP. Wouldn’t that be bizarre?!”

Yes, I’ve thought about that. It would be cruel on Rafa if he earnt #1 but it never showed officially because of the delay. However, I don’t think this kind of assistance can help Fed forever. Fed defends 1000 pts at US Open, Rafa only 150. The ranking will still change hands by the end of the year.

I just hope Rafa makes the semi final at Cincy. He shouldn’t make it his goal to win it, but just to do enough, and save something for Beijing and USO. It’s going to be a cramped schedule.

“Hey, hang on now — we’ve not yet had our first date, or held hands, and you’re into us already being married? :) That’s a new one; or will I be a mail order bride? And what awful things will you be doing which would entail your having to cover your tracks. I don’t know about you JCF, now you have me wondering, and I’m going to have to think about the marriage. :) I hope you know I’m just kidding around and exchanging light banter. :) This laugh’s on me.”

Whoa… Arr.. erm.. LOL!

I was under the assumption you were already married. But I’m sure all married couples have at least SOME secrets that they’d rather the other not know about, even if it’s nothing too major, perhaps something embarrassing. It’s just freaky to be close to someone who reads you like a book. You’re a funny girl.


TD (Tam) Says:

What a nice surprise to see “old man” Kiefer in the final of a AMS! Congrats to him. I didn’t think his match with Simon was very good (painful to see him make it more difficult than it need be with all those unforced errors) but he never got down on himself and kept plugging away. Good for him!

Very happy to see Nadal move on to another final. Murray’s behavior was deplorable but the fans and media will ignore it and let it pass because he’s not American like the other Andy, who gets criticized for breathing.

Good luck to Rafa in the final!


matt Says:

I have just read a Spanish forum ( in which there are people from Manacor and supposedly know Rafa) that Rafa Nadal is not going to Cincinatti next week.

If that is true, I think he’s making a mistake.

He has one week off between Cincinatti and Olympics and another week off between Olympics and the USOPEN, so he doesn’t need to skip Cincinatti to save energy to the USOPEN.

If he has knee problems that’s another story, but I didn’t see anything wrong with his knees this week.


Shital Green Says:

Daniel,
I observed the same thing above in my response to JCF. Let me quote: “In a sense, Rafa will be mathematically No. 1 without appearing on the board in one of the scenarios that you discussed.”
Like you said, Fed could be regaining his No. 1 without having to lose the position in paper. If Fed loses No. 1 position after Cincy but wins Olympic and quickly regains it, it will be really weird because Rafa becomes No. 1 in the transitional period without appearing in the ATP board . History will find it anomalous.


Noel Says:

Von,Jane,JCF,Kroll,Shital etc

WOW! I guess I have a case to defend even though the investigation, prosecution and conviction process is over. How naive I was to assume that my disclaimer would suffice.I should have been actively following the responses to clear the air before it became such a big issue.I have been pronounced guilty of being a nasty imposter, a gutless hypocrite,a con artist, untrustworthy, treacherous, a trickster etc etc.May evil befall me as per Von’s wishes!

I hate to defend myself for a crime I didn’t commit and to put myself in the ‘dock’.I’d normally find it beneath my dignity to even respond to the allegations that have been made and certainly to the conclusions that have been reached.It probably is futile given that most of you are convinced that I have been ‘found’ with the ‘smoking gun’ as it were.I know my conscience is clear.However,I guess I owe it to people I like interacting with esp Jane and other persons who provide quality inputs like Jcf/Giner, Matt etc and whose views I respect for fairness/balance.I have not been here for long but I guess I had a good reputation going by some reactions and that obviously lies in tatters.I guess my credibility was not sufficient for anyone to even consider a different possibility.

I assert again that Noel and roddick is a saint are not the same and that post quoted by Von was not written by me even though there are many points in that post I find merit in.Simply put,it is not my ‘style’ to abuse people in the manner in which that poster writes.I can’t recall a single post where I have tried to abuse anybody.I also don’t think that this poster is rod is a don… or spin etc because the poster doesn’t appear totally crazy and makes some reasonable points as well. The very same writing ‘style’ was initially suspected by Von to be that of some ‘Joker’ if you read her reaction to that post.She didn’t find any resemblance to my ‘style’ at that time.I wonder why; given her expertise and great memory.I can’t recall reading any post by ‘Joker’ but it appears that he/she is/was some nasty poster.I’d love Von to analyze all these ‘nasty’ posters’ ‘style’ and see if she can come up with something more meaningful before jumping the gun and hanging me.This is despite the fact that I have expressed my liking for Rod publicly and I don’t think I have written anything bad about him ever.

I am also almost 100% certain that the quoted post didn’t originate from my computer because very few people have access to it and that too only rarely.My cousin has come for the weekend and he assures me that he didn’t write it.I’d be shocked if he did even though he likes watching tennis and is a Fed fan like me.He is himself very sorry that what he thought of as a small prank could have such serious ramifications.He has assured me that he didn’t write it.I believe him because he is young and immature and just can’t write that sort of stuff and because I also think that I read that post first before he did.He just took a fancy for that ‘creative’ name.
Rest assured Von;no one,including me,has been using my computer for anti-Von or anti-rod purposes and I am almost positive about it.
This impostor has probably an axe to grind with Von more than anything and that brings me to the motive or agenda that I might have in ‘appearing’ fair/sweet/cordial/accommodating to Von in particular if I were a rabid anti-rod person.I know she is a big rod fan but I am also a big fed fan and ‘logically’ I should be indulging in demeaning rafa and nole because they have turned his life upside down.If it indeed was my agenda to settle any personal scores-and I really wonder what they could be- with Von,I won’t have gotten friendly with Von and that too at largely her initiative.

I have enough courage of conviction to express myself if I feel like.I normally don’t join issues with people because that means you must respond to their responses and it’d be rude to leave the ‘chat’ midway esp with a reasonable member.I can be accused of avoiding controversies but I have expressed myself on such issues if I felt strongly about it.The light situation in wimby final is a case in point.I have criticized Fed on this forum in a constructive manner and praised his opponents despite the risk of retaliation from fanboys.I don’t need to hide my ‘real’ identity and rest assured that I am not the ‘double-faced enigma’(Jekyll and Hyde anyone? ) that jcf thinks I am.
I know that it doesn’t matter in the long run because my conscience is clear but I have been left very disturbed that so many people consider me an imposter……..I rest my case here for the ‘jury’ to decide.


Shital Green Says:

I saw this new US Open Series commercial this morning on NBC. It has mainly Rafa and JMac. It starts with something like “Rafa the best player of the world/ the new champion,” and not a trace of Federer anywhere (unfair to a degree, depends how you look). JMac pops up screaming with a guitar. Choreographed in muscle shirt, headband, guitar, he seems to be impersonating a hard rocker (Axl Rod in short hair?). I like it.


Noel Says:

Von,
I enjoyed interacting with you and I wish it had lasted longer than some posts and emails.Do you seriously believe that I am a ‘con man’ and that all this is an elaborately staged drama for me to get friendly with you and others while at the same time having some sinister agenda?I didn’t ask you to teach me how to type smileys?you volunteered yourself and I am thankful to you for that.Does it appear possible to you that I was deliberately not using the smiley ‘trick’ and hoping a Von to bump into me some day to teach that?Who asked for my email id and what is it that I demanded of you except a bit of cyber-friendship?Do you think I’d mail –instead of posting-what I wrote to you if I didn’t have genuine concern?Do you think that my email id/name/gender/age/profession etc etc are all fake?You really give me far too much credit than I deserve or can ever be capable of.I have never been bestowed with even a single one of the various wonderful adjectives you have used to describe me.I have suffered abuse on racial/ethnic lines on the forums before but this is really totally different.The basic premise in a friendship is trust and because you deem me untrustworthy,I guess I am at your mercy as far as our ‘friendship’ is concerned.The least you could have done was to email me and clarify before going public with your ‘findings’.I was the one who pointed it out the moment I realized,to my utter horror,that it was not my name that came out on top of the post.Shital green was kind enough not to doubt my disclaimer initially but to him, I am your fake friend now.As you have said before,you have tunnel vision. Please don’t jump to conclusions before you have established the motive for instance.What prevents me from thinking that you have a hidden agenda yourself because you have had such terrible experience on this forum?Even if your theory is backed by what you deem is ‘solid’ evidence,you must keep your hand to your heart and ask yourself if what you think is really possible and there exists any valid reason for me to be the ‘con artist’ or some sort of psycho in the light of our interactions.you will be hard put to find the answers unless you think that I am a nutcase and the most absurd and weird things are possible.Think about the ‘why’ question and if you still come to the same conclusion,I guess I will have to say good bye as well.Thank you for being nice in the past.I am so sorry for having ‘tortured’ you so much.May evil indeed befall me!


Shital Green Says:

Well, there are a couple of different commercials for the US Open Series. One is Fed and JMac passing back and forth a coffee mug with World Greatest Tennis Player scribed on it.


matt Says:

Noel, I like your posts, don’t leave.(even in the strangest case you had two personalities, I like the Noel one :) )


rjnick Says:

Anyone else notice that according to the ATP live scoring, the Toronto final has already started even though it’s not going to be on ESPN for another hour?


rjnick Says:

Anyone else notice that according to the ATP live scoring, the Toronto final has already started even though it’s not going to be on ESPN for another hour?


Shital Green Says:

Rafa wins in straight sets, without any resistance of whatsoever. Kiefer is playing as if for the sake of formality, to crown Rafa. This final is already boring, not much tennis in it.


Daniel Says:

Well Shital, Nadal is not in his best days. He made 6 UE in 3 games, is missing some easy returns, he looks kind of cold. Who knows…


andrea Says:

i was waiting to be convinced about nadal’s second half of the season and if toronto results are any indication, it’s looking pretty good for nadal.

i hope Nadal gets the #1 ranking before the US Open. that would be pretty cool. might put some fire in old roger’s pants.


Noel Says:

Jane,
I think I need to write to you because you were the first person who really encouraged me and boosted my morale when I started posting some time back.I think I really owe it to you more than anybody else on this forum not only because you are a very fair and balanced poster yourself but also because you have always been very kind to me. Thanks for saying that you really ‘liked’ my posts.I feel happy that I ‘seemed’ nice.The past tense makes it very hard for me because I won’t like at least you to think that I am some imposter.I can assure you that I am not ‘deceitful’ and I am sorry if you are ‘shocked’.I can be ‘forthright’ when I need to but I normally do not like using strong words because I am not that regular here and I must visit the forum daily to respond to the inevitable reaction or objection a ‘strong’ post will elicit.It’d be hugely unfair not to respond to at least the valid and fair objections/comments.I have seen people holding a grudge against someone when their queries/comments/responses go unanswered.I hope I am able to continue on this forum but it appears unlikely given the hostility that I have seen already.


Vulcan Says:

Hmmm…where are all the Rafa hardcourt naysayers today.


jane Says:

Noel,

I am happy you posted a response; I had enjoyed your posts, as you know, and responding is better that going away.

However, Von has at least two strong points for her suspicion.

1. Why or how would that other name appear when you put up your rankings post on this thread?

2. Why would both posters have those style idosyncracies of no space after the period and lower case for proper nouns?

Those two issues linger for me too.

Having read your past posts, it is surprising you’d respond in such a way as Roddick is a saint did, as you always seemed like a balanced fan. But you are a Fed fan so maybe you felt the need to unload, but didn’t want to start a war? Maybe you hit a tipping point? I don’t know.

I’ll leave it for you and Von to discuss, since it really is between you two, but since you included my name in your post, and since we have had good exchanges in the past, I wanted to say something.


jane Says:

Commentators today said that the average tennis ball rotation is 2500, but Rafa’s is 5000 – gives an indication of how really wicked his top spin is.

Kroll – sorry – that was me who is guilty of the “objective fan” oxymoron; I had called you that on this thread I believe. I thought you had said on this board once that you’re a Rafa fan but you always seemed able to see the forest through the trees – whatever that means – what I mean is you could see faults and strengths, both. Anyway, my bad.


Von Says:

Noel:

I’ve read all that you have written. and I apologize for accusing you wrongfully, since you claim you are not the offender or guilty of duplicity. However, What I don’t understand is how someone’s post name could appear on a post you wrote. You or someone had to insert that post name in the box which state “Leave a comment”. Please, I am confused, I want to believe you, but how would that post name appear in the box? If you think this kind of stuff makes me feel good, it doesn’t. I feel stunned.

You claimed originally your cousin was fooling around with your computer, Is he that playful that he wuld insert another poster’s name in the name box and not tell you? Why? And, isn’t it coincidental that there was a post earlier on yesterday morning, which was written by that same poster ridiculing myself, and a few other posters for posting on the topic of Federer’s girl friend. I’m sorry, I’d like to believe you had nothing whatsoever to do with that post, but it was clear that it emanated from your computer. If it didn’t, how was the name at the beginning of the post, “Roddick is a Saint says”, followed by a paragraph written by you mentioning the points, followed by a post you quoted that was addressed to Matt on the points and ranking system. I honestly want to believe you but I don’t understand how that post name could appear on your post.

I don’t care what you or who wrote about Roddick, it’s normal for people to not like a player, but what I don’t understand if someone feels so strongly about their opinions and want to defend an issue, why not use their correct post name, instead of a fictitious one, to get their point across to me or whoever it is that’s offending them. And, Noel, it still comes back to how did that name “Roddick is a Saint” appear in the name box on the post wherein you clarified the breakdown of the points? I’m sorry, but I am baffled.

I enjoyed your posts and I also am thankful for your response to my email questions regarding that family in India, and whether you believe this or not, I am saddened that something of such an infantile nature has occurred.

There is no need for you to say goodbye or refrain from posting. I enjoyd your posts, as well as several others. You have great insight and knowledge about the sport, tennis, much more than I have. You would be more beneficial to this site and the knowledgeable posters who post here, than I am, or could ever be. If you feel uncomfortable with my presence on the site then I’ll leave. I’m sure there are many who would prefer to read your knowledgeable posts than mine, considering I’ve had some unpleasantness occurring between myself and some other Federer posters. There’s a majority here of Federer posters, and since you’rea federer fan, I think it would be only fitting that you continue to post and impart to all your illuminating and insightful comments.

Again, I’m sorry to have misjudged you, and hope you will forgive my accusations, which were based on the facts as presented, what i read, and the fictitious name appearing on a post which emanated from your computer. Maybe the answer lies with your cousin, whom you mentioned was fooling around with your computer and he inadvertently typed that “Roddick is a saint” name in the comment name box. I don’t know what else to say, except that I’m truly sorry for whatever unhappines i have caused you and hope that you will continue to post. The character Noel is a very nice, polite and respectful one, and one which adds great depth and illumintion to this site. Again, Noel, I’m sorry for blaming you for an error you did not commit. My apology is sincere and I hope you will forgive my accusations. Thanks.


Shital Green Says:

Noel,
I did not get to interact with and know you much in the past, so it does not matter to me what you did or did not do then. We should leave the past behind and move on. If there is any lingering doubt about you, your honesty in the future should be able to remove it. I have no hard feelings against you. Your input has generally been worthy of appreciation. So, I would say stay around.


Noel Says:

matt Says:

Noel, I like your posts, don’t leave.(even in the strangest case you had two personalities, I like the Noel one :) )
Matt,
I really appreciate your vote of confidence in me.It is as timely as they come.It really makes me feel much better that such a senior and experienced person likes my posts.Thanks a ton!You can rest assured that the Noel personality is the only one.
I get goose bumps just thinking that you watched Pancho and the Rocket.I wonder if you have watched Hoad play Pancho.I read somewhere that Hoad could reach unbelievable levels on his day while Pancho was more consistent.I wonder what your opinion is.
I also agree about your Rafa/wilander comments.I watched a lot of lendl-wilander matches and wilander’d win many of those encounters even though Lendl used to be the favourite in almost all the matches they played.Rafa’s ability simply to win matches is quite amazing too.He can have off days but he just finds a way to win matches.For a person so young compared to say a Fed,Rafa’s thinking on the feet,as it were,is quite brilliant.He is able to adapt to different styles of his opponents and is not rigid or stubborn about his tactics/strategy.The match against Gulbis at wimby is a case in point.After getting bombed by the Gulbis’s serve in the first set,Rafa made the required adjustment and started returning much better.The inexperienced Gulbis didn’t even notice it if we were to go by what he said in the interview.He has a knack for knowing where the percentages lie against which player or in which situation.He attacked Murray in the quarter final but reverted to his time-tested tactics against Fed in the final. On the other hand,I always get the feeling that Fed doesn’t think about his tactics/strategy as much esp when he is in trouble.


jane Says:

I agree with matt, Shital and Vonl -

Noel – you should stick around (as should you Von!!) – whatever happened; it’s over.

Peace.


Shital Green Says:

Congratulation to Rafa for an easy victory!
The Nueva número uno’s dominance continues, now begins on hard court as well.


Vulcan Says:

Noel, I would offer one piece of advice…someone on here previously asked you what your gender was and you never responded (at least that I recall and read)…so it might be wise of you to disclose your ASL so we all know who were dealing with once and for all.


jane Says:

Congrats to Rafa for kicking more butt – clay, grass, hardcourts. He has conquered them all in succession.

Kiefer’s speech was funny. Rafa’s too, with his “sorry for today” to Kiefer. Very funny.

Shital those ads sound hilarious too; I haven’t seen them on TV but I am going to check youtube. Thanks for mentioning them.


I love the Game Says:

vamos nadal

boring final i hope he can improve his serve speed he needs it to win matches and his game was not too good. His FH was leeaking errors

does anybody know the kind of surface they use in olympic?

kroll,
reverse bias is electrical engineering term.


Von Says:

Noel:

Jane wrote: Noel – you should stick around (as should you Von!!) – whatever happened; it’s over.”

I agree with everyone and would appreciate very much if you would keep on posting. I’ll consider what happened one of those unexplainable computer quirks and leave it at that. Sometimes we do things by rote, not thinking, and most probably after reading that post from “Roddick is a saint” you may have had those words in your mind and just automatically typed them in your name box. Such actions happen without us giving it a second thought. Probably you were preoccupied with what was said in the Roddick is a saint post, as you stated he/she made some valid points. Even though Roddick was ridiculed in that post and I was offended, what’s done can’t be undone, and we should move on, put this behind us, and concentrate on what’s happening in tennis, which is the reason we all congregate on this site, to air our views on the events that transpire.

Again, please forgive me for whatever I’ve said or done to upset you, I reacted out of shock and disbelief. However, I also hope you can understand that post from Roddick is a saint, was unkind toward Roddick, myself, and the others who posted comments on that thread. I am willing to put all of this behimnd me and give you the benefit of the doubt while attributing the post name to a computer mix up. I hope you will weigh all of these points and consider staying, posting and interacting with your fellow posters. My request is genuine and straight from the heart.

Ps. If i have repeated myself, please excuse the redundancy, it’s just that I’m upset about the whole situation.


matt Says:

Not very good match in tough, windy conditions.

Nadal wasn’t quite good today, but still it was enough to beat Kiefer 6-3, 6-2.

It is the 12th Masters-Series title (previously known as Super-9) for Nadal, quite impressive.

The Masters-Series (Super-9) started in 1990. This is the list of players that won most titles:

Agassi: 17
Federer: 14
Nadal: 12
Sampras: 11
Muster: 8
Chang: 7
Courier: 5
Becker: 5
Ríos: 5
Kuerten: 5
Safin: 5
Edberg: 4
Medveded: 4
Ferrero: 4
Roddick: 4

It is a bit scary that Nadal has just turn 22 years old and already has 12 MS titles.(Just two shy of Federer and one more than Sampras).

And four of them have been on hardcourt.


Noel Says:

Von,Jane
It is not as if rias name in my rankings post came out of thin air.Please read what i have said carefully.not only did my cousin insert the name,he also inserted his email id.Where have I denied that.That is exactly what he is sorry for.As for why did he do that,i will still not think in terms of a sinister motive on his part to malign my name on this forum but his prank has just done that.who knows this was his intention all along but i know him well and will give him the benefit of doubt even though he has made my life miserable due to all this typing i have to do to explain my situation.He didn’t invent that name either.that would be preposterous and too much of a coincidence.in any case that didn’t happen.he also read that rias post which you think i composed and the subsequent reactions.he found the post name particularly funny.My mistake was that i simply submitted my rankings post without noticing the changes that have been made by him in these yellow boxes.I don’t know if you fill it every time you post because there is no need to do it because at least on my computer,my name and email id always appear in these boxes whenever I visit this forum.I don’t think it is a computer to computer issue though because i have seen this automatic insertion on some other sites also.it is very convenient because you don’t need to enter your name and email id every time you visit the site or want to post.I have come to take it for granted and as much as it may befuddle you,I don’t even notice my user name and email id most of the time while i am typing in the comment box.I don’t need to because nobody else shares my computer on a regular basis and certainly not for posting to tennis-x.And surely if I had noticed that,I’d have avoided this trouble.


Daniel Says:

About all great things in Nadal’s game what impresses me the most is every time he had a difficult game saving break points he than break the guy right after. It happend with Gasquet in the 3rd or 4th game on second set, with Murray too and today with kiefer in the 5th game second set.

I don’t know how to express it in english but here in Brazil translating we say something like: who doesn’t do take!


JCF Says:

Noel,

I don’t care whether you were an imposter or not. What you did or didn’t do doesn’t bother me. I found your posts under ‘Noel’ pleasant enough to read and respond to. It doesn’t get me riled up if you had other personas.

‘Roddick is a saint’ is a strange name to take, even for a fan. Not too many would call him a saint, and you wouldn’t find someone using the name ‘Fed/Rafa is a saint’ either.

But unlike Von, I’ll let it pass.

As for Rafa.. wow. I didn’t even know it was on and over already. Congrats to Rafa, and the hardcourt naysayers should be quiet for a while at least. If it’s true that Rafa will skip Cincinati, he can still dethrone Fed without playing if Fed doesn’t make the final. :D

If Fed makes the Cincy final and loses, he should be 5 points ahead of Rafa. In other words, the olympics is going to be key.


JCF Says:

Vulcan Says:

“Hmmm…where are all the Rafa hardcourt naysayers today.”

‘He hasn’t won a hard court title in 18 months’ can’t be used anymore. ‘How can he be #1 without any hard court titles?’ sounds dubious now, even without a win in Toronto. ‘He’s never played well in the second half of a season’ is something I would dispute already with an AMS win.

We all know who will be the 3 favorites for the US Open – the usual suspects. What interests me is what order the pundits will rank them in. I guess that’s what cincy and Beijing are for. I’m kind of glad he’ll skip Cincy, because he wasn’t likely to win two AMS back to back, and it’s better to keep the streak alive. It also shows he is either confident about his inauguration, or indifferent. He knows he isn’t the one sweating it out so he probably doesn’t care.

Current betting odds have Federer slightly ahead of Nadal (1.5 vs 2.5), who is ahead of Djokovic for US Open. Current Wimbledon (09) odds have Nadal favorite ahead of Federer, which is interesting. Some people are selling their stock already.


Von Says:

Kroll:

“Perhaps what matt (and I) said on the matter can still be consistent in the light of the above remark?”

Absolutely. One can have loads of talent but without the hard work and willingness to improve upon our natural skills, we’ll remain stagnant. Another point that was made is that of Rafa’s smarts. Even though his is not a natural talent, his smartness, together with his hard work, and his physical strength, will give him an edge over anyone that’s naturally talented. It’s a sort of parallel to those who are book smart as opposed to someone who is street smart. Unless he’s plagued with injuries, he’ll be unstoppable, and will be the dominant force in tennis.


Shital Green Says:

I love the Game,

It is DecoTurf II, the same as USO. Finals will be 5 sets, and the rest 3 sets; The third or fifth sets will be played out (until a player wins six or more games by a margin of two or more), and all other sets will be decided by tie-breaks if they reach 6-6.


jane Says:

Noel – I have just gone back and read the rias post and something about it makes me think it’s not you – namely, you’ve, in the past, stated that you think Fed used the mono angle a little too much post-AO, and yet rias goes on about Fed’s illness in the off season. These things do seem to contradict one another.

Anyhow, I am no lawyer, but I have said this before and will say it once more: I have always enjoyed our exchanges and I’d like to have more, so do stick around and continue to offer your insights into the game we’re all, clearly, somewhat addicted to.

Moving on, what do you think will happen in Cincy? Especially with Nole, Roger, Roddick, Murray and Rafa? I am curious to see how (or if) these 5 guys will use their losses and wins to motivate them to continue.


jane Says:

“Another point that was made is that of Rafa’s smarts.”

Yep he is tactically great – his movement is also phenomenal; the combination of the two means he’s got great offense and defense.

I could see Murray moving up in this regard if he keeps the focus he’s shown of late. Not only does his have a wicked shot arsenal, if he can think clearly about when to use which, he should be moving on up.

BTW – that very funny USO Series commercial is on youtube: search under “John Mcenroe annoys Rafael Nadal”


Von Says:

Noel:

I understand what you’re saying and I accept your explanation. I would like to just leave the matter in the past. Please, let’s move on and forget the whole situation. I now wish I had not mentioned anything and have learnt a lesson from all of this, which is, I will keep my thoughts to myself and will refrain from indulging in pointing out anything I see that’s out of the ordinary. In sum, it’s not worth the time and trouble, not to mention the unpleasantness. Again, my apologies for being too observant and acting on impulse. i hope with this post, we have put this matter to rest, and you will forgive my impulsiveness. Please.


Noel Says:

Jane,
2. Why would both posters have those style idosyncracies of no space after the period and lower case for proper nouns?
I really wonder if I am the only person on this forum to do it and that too on a consistent basis.I completely agree about the no space after period and i almost always do it but you can’t be very sure about the small case proper nouns.It all depends on whether i am in a hurry or want to be correct.rias has almost zero small case proper nouns in his post.I think this is a trivial point.I can find more merit in the arguments made by rias and possibly some similarity to my ‘style’as it were because i have already said that he makes some good points esp in the latter part of his post.I can write those points myself regarding professional athletes or even fed’s scheduling which are true.However,I have talked to you before about my not liking his fooling around with pete in those meaningless exos which somehow contradicts the point rias makes…

“Having read your past posts, it is surprising you’d respond in such a way as Roddick is a saint did, as you always seemed like a balanced fan. But you are a Fed fan so maybe you felt the need to unload, but didn’t want to start a war? Maybe you hit a tipping point? I don’t know.”

It is good to see that you have found a ‘valid’ reason or motive for a fake identity and something really plausible to bite my teeth into.Yes,i am a fed fan and a big one at that and i have openly admitted it to you and others but have you ever felt that i was a ‘fanboy’ or have i demeaned his opponents.i will ‘unload’ if i need to but for what.i have said several times that his decline was expected and that his absolute prime got over some time early in 2007.as for the ‘tipping point’,his two losses to canas were the tipping points for me.realism set in then and there even if he was to go on to win two more slams in 2007.Have you seen me join issues one way or another about fed which may seem remotely like ‘unloading’.i did express my disappointment after his toronto loss but i also expected it almost.i was definitely very apprehensive……..as for ‘fear’ of starting a war,i like to make arguments with logic and facts and even though i may express something that i get a feeling about,i rarely let it colour my overall judgement.of course,being a fan i will see something that you may not agree with.remember the ballet :) in any case,i have always been led to believe that it is a fed fanboy forum and therefore the numbers will likely favour me in a ‘war’.however,I’d like to believe that i can win a ‘war’ all on my own if my facts and logic are right and without using rias’s venom. In fact if i am polite,i probably will sound more convincing to the ‘warriors’ that really matter.


JCF Says:

Ooh.. hot off the ATP’s website:

“Nadal, who has ranked No. 2 for a record 157 weeks, will become the new No. 1 next Sunday if he wins the title at the Western & Southern Financial Group Masters in Cincinnati and Federer loses before the semifinals. After Federer’s second round loss to Gilles Simon earlier this week, Nadal has now cut the gap to a mere 300 points and is potentially just one week away from ending Federer’s 234 week reign (since February 2004) at the top spot (see below).”

Now I’m confused. Am I missing something? According to the math we did, he doesn’t need to win the title in Cincy to clinch #1. Now the ATP is saying he has to win it AND Fed has to lose in the QF? Winning the title would give Nadal 495 points regardless of what Fed does, which is more than the 300 pts he needs to close the gap. I still don’t know where the 300 points comes from, since I calculate 150 is the difference. The Stuttgart points (250) have already been removed from Rafa’s ranking.

I’m redoing the math one last time.

Fed – 6255
Rafa – 6105

If Rafa wins Cincy and Fed loses in QF:

Fed – 5880
Rafa – 6600

That’s a margin of 720 pts. Unless I’m missing something very obvious, the ATP is inhaling something major.

If Fed only makes a final, he will have 6105 pts, which is tied to what Rafa will have if he loses his first match. According to my math, if Fed doesn’t defend his title, and Rafa wins a single match in Cincy he is #1 when the computer is updated. If Fed doesn’t make the final, he will lose his ranking even if Rafa doesn’t show up.

Someone please tell me where I went wrong, since the ATP doesn’t agree with me. Did we reach a conclusion that I missed or skipped? ATP says that the two AMS points won’t be adjusted for 2 weeks, so we are not going to be seeing those tournaments counted twice.

But just in case that is wrong, I’ll do the math assuming the points are counted twice.

Fed – 6605
Rafa – 6330

Rafa wins Cincy, Fed loses in QF:

Fed – 6730
Rafa – 6830

Rafa loses in final, Fed loses in QF:

Fed – 6730
Rafa – 6680

The ATP’s math is consistent only if the tournament points are counted twice, but that is not what we were led to believe from other articles they’ve issued. If this is true, then it will be a gift for Fed who gets to defend his ranking even if he officially should have lost it. I guess we will find out tomorrow when the ATP site is updated.


Von Says:

JCF:

“Not too many would call him a saint, and you wouldn’t find someone using the name ‘Fed/Rafa is a saint’ either.

The poster who used the the “saint” desgnation was being insulting to Roddick. anyway, it’s over, and I have let it pass.

On another topic, I was being facetious in that post about dating and marriage. I’m not available. I was just being playful about the mail order stuff, etc. Hope you understand. You’re right it is scary to have a partner who remembers everything. That’s the first characteristic you have to pay attention to when you’re going to settle down, especially since you claim you have a bad memory. :)


jane Says:

Noel,

Thanks for your response; I;ll take your word for it. And no – you have never seemed like a fanboy. In fact, I’ve told you as much. I wouldn’t've even pegged you for a fed fan given you fair posts on so many players, as I’ve said in the past.

But last night, after seeing all the posts, and confusing data, I was looking for answers.

You’ve given them; I added another in your support in my 4:45 post today.

Yes I remember the ballet. :-) Let’s move on Noel. This typing is wearing my out and I’ll never get my students’ papers marked at this rate (now you know my guilty procrastination habit).

Cheerio


JCF Says:

matt & Kroll.

I like the analysis about Rafa being a hard worker rather than a gifted player. Reminds me of someone like Novotna, but without the choking.

Does this mean that if Rafa never wins any more slams, he is an OVER-achiever rather than an UNDER-achiever?

I know there are plenty of players who put in hard work to overcome their relative lack of talent, but he seems to be doing pretty well compared to others like him.

Now that he has Montreal, Toronto, Madrid and IW, I’m hoping people drop the ‘he can’t play on hard courts’ canard. I don’t even think hard courts are his weakest surface. That will be settled when we see the results for the rest of his season.


Noel Says:

vulcan,
Vulcan Says:

Noel, I would offer one piece of advice…someone on here previously asked you what your gender was and you never responded (at least that I recall and read)…so it might be wise of you to disclose your ASL so we all know who were dealing with once and for all.

I am sorry i don’t know what asl is.please elaborate.
as for that gender query,i just wanted to increase Jcf’s ocd/torture a bit more. :) von can vouch for this although she herself initially thought that she knew my gender.I was thinking about writing shemale to jcf but he could have been offended.Sorry Jcf for increasing your ‘torture’.evidently Jcf didn’t rest until it was finally revealed by Von yesterday but in the context of my ‘deceit’ jcf was wondering whether i had given von the wrong info.for your info,i am a male.
i just google searched asl and if you mean age/sex/location which appears likely,i am in my early thirties/male/indian.


I love the Game Says:

shital

Thanxs,
that makes it a fed favorable surface.
What did they play it on in Athens(2004) if it was same surface as now,its kinda strange why fed lost early cos he was already playing well by then?


Noel Says:

Shital

Shital Green Says:

“Noel,
I did not get to interact with and know you much in the past, so it does not matter to me what you did or did not do then. We should leave the past behind and move on. If there is any lingering doubt about you, your honesty in the future should be able to remove it. I have no hard feelings against you. Your input has generally been worthy of appreciation. So, I would say stay around.”

I haven’t been around for long.It has been probably two or three months at most although i did take a break when you told me to go and write a novel.i was told later by von and jane that it was your style of humour.i think the first post that i posted thereafter was a one liner regarding the feeling that i had of the wimby being rafa’s to lose after the murray match.i guess i took von’s brevity is the soul of wit motto a bit too seriously before going back to my bad ways :) thanks for the support.I really appreciate it.


Noel Says:

JCF Says:

“Noel,
I don’t care whether you were an imposter or not. What you did or didn’t do doesn’t bother me. I found your posts under ‘Noel’ pleasant enough to read and respond to. It doesn’t get me riled up if you had other personas.”

JCF,
Believe you me,i have no other personas.I am happy that you liked my posts and the respect is mutual.I like jcf/giner’s style of taking on various assertions and responding with logical reasoning and fairness even though i may not always agree with everything. your bit about you wanting hewitt to lose and feeling bad when he won{??!!) was something i couldn’t comprehend even for an unpatriotic aussie.even more perplexing was your wanting to go back in time and to reverse past results or cheering for rafa instead of fed at miami 2005 for instance.
I also wanted to know how much interest you take in cricket.BTW,i am sorry for deliberately not answering your gender query pronto and i hope you believe the answer provided by von to be true. Thanks again!


Kroll Says:

JCF

“Unless I’m missing something very obvious, the ATP is inhaling something major.”

Well they ve been doing that for a while now so I wouldn’t be surprised. I think your math is right though.

———–
jane

“Kroll – sorry – that was me who is guilty of the “objective fan” oxymoron; I had called you that on this thread I believe. I thought you had said on this board once that you’re a Rafa fan but you always seemed able to see the forest through the trees – whatever that means – what I mean is you could see faults and strengths, both. Anyway, my bad. ”

Take it easy girl. You were using it in a rather different connotation (which is not out of order) but the other guy was using it in a literal manner which made no sense whatsoever.

——
Von

“I now wish I had not mentioned anything and have learnt a lesson from all of this, which is, I will keep my thoughts to myself and will refrain from indulging in pointing out anything I see that’s out of the ordinary.”

You ve got to be kidding! Its Not a big deal. We are on an anonymous forum so character sleights are not the worst thing ever are they? You made a funny observation, mildly malicious at the worst.
Hardly one requiring a groveling apology.

Should have said “Oops” and got on with it.


Kroll Says:

JCF

“Now that he has Montreal, Toronto, Madrid and IW, I’m hoping people drop the ‘he can’t play on hard courts’ canard. I don’t even think hard courts are his weakest surface. That will be settled when we see the results for the rest of his season.”

But he won those over different seasons. What I mean is, he needs to be judged as a champion and as such that entails consistently proving himself, which he has not done yet on hardcourts. We already knew he ‘can’ win on hardcourts but is he good enough to be dominant on them (as a matter of principle I mean)? Which I dont think he has proven yet. If he wins Cinci and/or USO, fine, but for now, I think the jury is still out.


Von Says:

Kroll:

“You made a funny observation, mildly malicious at the worst.
Hardly one requiring a groveling apology.”

Thanks, Kroll. Even though I have apologized profusely to Noel, I suppose I need to do some more groveling to him; not once has Noel acknowledged any of my attempts to set matters straight. Now it seems to me as though I’m the one who’s the offender. C’est la vie. I’m done, and enough said.


JCF Says:

“What did they play it on in Athens(2004) if it was same surface as now,its kinda strange why fed lost early cos he was already playing well by then?”

He complained about the conditions being windy in athens. He doesn’t handle the wind well. He almost lost to Agassi in the USO later when it was massively windy.

Noel,

I’m not a cricket fan. Hewitt is a guy you either love or hate down here. All of my friends and colleagues interested in tennis hate him and root against him. I don’t hate him as much as I used to, but he really rubbed me the wrong way earlier in his career. There was one time he was playing in his home town, and he was leading something like 6-0 5-0 against another aussie and got what he thought was a bad call against him, then he made a scene, and the audience yelled “grow up”. Later when he was questioned about it, he said “that’s just the stupidity of the Australian public”. I just don’t like his attitude.

Kroll,

“But he won those over different seasons. What I mean is, he needs to be judged as a champion and as such that entails consistently proving himself, which he has not done yet on hardcourts.”

Fair point.

“We already knew he ‘can’ win on hardcourts”

The word is “can’t”, at least that is the general notion, not just on this forum but everywhere. The court is too fast for him, the bounce is too low, his knees can’t take the stress, you know the drill.

“but is he good enough to be dominant on them (as a matter of principle I mean)?”

I don’t think that’s a reasonable expectation. No one is going to dominate the hard courts from here on. The HC season is too long for that, plus with Fed and Djokovic around that’s asking too much. No one should expect him to ‘dominate’. To win one hard slam every year or two would be as much as you could ask of anyone. He doesn’t have to win it to be #1.

“Which I dont think he has proven yet. If he wins Cinci and/or USO, fine, but for now, I think the jury is still out.”

No one other than Federer has dominated the hard courts. I don’t think anyone realistically expects Nadal to dominate the next 4 years the way Fed did 04-07. The people who believe he will finish with 10+ slams think he will do it over a long stretch (winning 1 or 2 slams per year), not 4 years (winning 3 slams per year) and then burn out.

He doesn’t NEED to dominate the hard courts. He does well enough on other surfaces to make up for it. My issue is with people who say he can’t play on hard at all, or that he can’t win a slam on it. That obviously isn’t you, but a bunch of people have ingrained into their heads that success on clay is inversely proportional to success on hard or grass, which is bollocks. If he DIDN’T dominate on clay the way he has, they’d actually give him better chances on hard.


JCF Says:

Kroll,

I think we agree that sometimes Rafa ‘can’ win on hard, and sometimes he ‘can’t’. All he’d have to do is pull off a ‘can’ at the right time and a big result will come.

If he wins 2 slams per year for the next 5 years, then he will finish up with 15 slams. Being realistic, I expect him to win 3 slams every 2 years (1.5 per year). That’s very doable if it includes one French each year, and every second year one of the other 3. He would end up with 12 or 13 if he doesn’t experience a career-ending injury.

With this kind of projection, he will never dominate the hard courts. But who is expecting him to? And who cares?

Fed will get his confidence back, and the #1 rank will shift back and forth every few weeks or months. Djokovic is the one that the jury is still out on, and Cincinnati will answer a question or two about him.


Von Says:

JCF:

“..which is bollocks.”

The British say “balderdash”, meaning he same as “bollocks”. Is “bollocks” an OZ slang word?


JCF Says:

Not that I know of, Von. But some use it. I like the word. It means balls if I’m not mistaken.

Jim Courier is an American and he uses it when he comes down here for the AO broadcasting. He’s a great commentator by the way. Mac used to be our star commentator but he pissed off somewhere and Jim was an even better replacement imo. He’s funny AND insightful.


Von Says:

Balderdash means the same as bollocks. There are two meanings (1) meaning nonsesne and (2) balls.


Noel Says:

“Von Says:
Noel:

I understand what you’re saying and I accept your explanation. I would like to just leave the matter in the past. Please, let’s move on and forget the whole situation. I now wish I had not mentioned anything and have learnt a lesson from all of this, which is, I will keep my thoughts to myself and will refrain from indulging in pointing out anything I see that’s out of the ordinary. In sum, it’s not worth the time and trouble, not to mention the unpleasantness. Again, my apologies for being too observant and acting on impulse. i hope with this post, we have put this matter to rest, and you will forgive my impulsiveness. Please.”

Von,
I am extremely sorry to not have even acknowledged your apology but believe me,I have never typed this much in one night in my entire life and I absolutely hate typing because of my slow speed.I was actually thinking of writing an email to you and therefore took a bit of a break.

No, No , No, I won’t like you to keep your thoughts to yourself or leave the forum.Please do not think that I am waging some war to keep you silent.Please don’t feel like an offender because I was ‘caught’ with the supposedly ‘smoking gun’ albeit only by you.I was disappointed about the quick disposal of the ‘case’ based on inconclusive supplementary evidence and without a chance given to the ‘criminal’ to explain his situation.I am sure that you know that even the most cruel offenders are given a chance to defend themselves and they are always presumed innocent till proven guilty.I think usa also follows a similar system.I have been forced to defend myself and even in defence,all I asked you guys/girls was to apply some logic and common sense given my past track record albeit of a very short period.I just want a tiny little space on this forum and it would really sadden me if I were to become the reason behind someone’s freedom of speech being curtailed or someone leaving the forum.I myself got the feeling typing so much today that I was wasting so much of my time here.I have told you in my email also that you don’t have to worry about ‘offending’ me when you compose your supposedly anti-Fed posts.It really took some time writing that email and I was shocked to see the trust deficit.Believe me,I wrote that in very good faith.I guess I got a bit too ambitious a bit too early.
All I need is to ignore the so called offensive posts as I have done with several other members’ posts.You,Jane,Shital,JCF etc are the life of this forum and this forum needs you guys/girls the most.I can only dream of posting with the sort of frequency that you do on a daily basis.It’d probably take a fortnight for me to even come close.I can’t imagine going to a forum where there is no chatter no matter how inane.I am passionate about the game and so are you and there should be room for every kind of thought.It is up to us to ignore the nasty/mindless ones and respond to the more reasonable ones.All of us are different in many ways and it takes all types to make it a bit of a melting pot thanks to this great thing called the internet.You won’t imagine how privileged I felt when I found out about Matt’s experience and what he brings to the forum.His first vote of confidence really perked me up when I was feeling very low indeed. Your astute observations have benefited me also with the smileys even if you now believe I knew them before.I’d have never realized the bit about space after period not only about myself but also about others’ posts in the forum because the sentences seem so spaced out when you read them.You get conscious about it only when typing in an ms word for instance because of the red underlining.Therefore keep observing and just be careful about whatever conclusions you reach before sharing them with fellow posters esp if it is a very serious charge you are going to make.

You know what,I really won’t have cared if others had accepted my disclaimer but even more important was the fact that I was no longer a totally anonymous poster to you and to a much lesser extent to Jane.Our email exchanges changed things a wee bit and I didn’t want you to gain an incorrect impression at least about where I came from.You say you are patriotic and although I don’t wear patriotism on my sleeve,I don’t want to convey a wrong message to people from a different country/culture.
I hope we can find common ground in the future even if only on other issues not related directly to the game.I don’t want to repeat what I wrote to you in the mail and I still haven’t changed my opinion about you.Stay well and stay happy. :)
However,my enthusiasm has now been tempered somewhat by this utterly avoidable exercise.I will see if I can regain it quickly.I hope everything gets normal and all of us really move on from here.Thanks again for reconsidering my case and acquitting me and my sincere apologies again for the delay in responding to your post.Hope all of us are able to forget it in a hurry and the focus must shift back to the game we love so much as the inevitable coronation of Rafa gets closer and closer.On to Cincinati!


zola Says:

Sean
thanks for the breakdown. Still very confusing.
The master series are mandatory. whatever the players get from them ( even 0) counts. So it cannot be dropped, not it will make another tournament drop from the rankings.

Anyway, Rafa has done more than enough, winning 7 titles so far this year. I think he should withdraw from Cincy. If not, I don’t care if he even reaches QF or not. He needs to rest before flying to Beijing and then back to US.


Roddick, Federer, Djokovic Out to Find Form in Cincy; Nadal Out for No. 1 Says:

[...] at least won a few matches before Andy Murray finally got in the win column for the first time against the Serb. Are these losses in tune to Nadal’s rise? I think [...]


Nadal Gets No. 1, Then Gets Clobbered by Djokovic; Jankovic New WTA No. 1? Says:

[...] to his first career Masters final. Can Murray now get a second win over Novak in as many weeks (he beat the Serb in the quarterfinals last week in Toronto)? I don’t think so, I’ll take Novak [...]

Top story: Coric Ends Nadal's Season In Basel, Federer Overwhelms Dimitrov; Ferrer v Murray In Valencia
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Oct 20 WTA - Oct 20
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Roger Federer2 Maria Sharapova
3 Rafael Nadal3 Simona Halep
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Petra Kvitova
5 David Ferrer5 Na Li
6 Tomas Berdych6 Agnieszka Radwanska
7 Kei Nishikori7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Marin Cilic8 Ana Ivanovic
9 Milos Raonic9 Caroline Wozniacki
10 Andy Murray10 Angelique Kerber
More: Tennis T-Shirts | Tennis Shop | Live Tennis Scores | Headlines

Copyright © 2003-2014 Tennis-X.com. All rights reserved.
This website is an independently operated source of news and information and is not affiliated with any professional organizations.