Murray Joins Federer, Halep, Hantuchova as Title Winners
by Staff | June 16th, 2013, 9:54 pm
  • 126 Comments

Week one on the grasscourts gave an indication who will be hot, and who will not heading into The Championships, otherwise known as Wimbledon, with one week left on the lawns before the All England Club.


Roger Federer won the Halle title, defeating an equally hot-handed Mikhail Youzhny.

Andy Murray got British pulses pounding by capturing the title at the Aegon Championships with a hard-fought 5-7, 7-5, 6-3 win over defending champion Marin Cilic for his third Queen’s Club title.

“I worked very hard in the time I had off to get myself back in the best shape possible,” said Murray, who missed the French Open with a back injury. “My team helped me a lot, they’ve been very patient with me.”

The players weathered a three-hour rain delay before the start of the match. The 24-year-old Cilic dropped to 9-8 in career finals.

On the women’s side Simona Halep and unseeded Daniela Hantuchova raised grasscourt trophies.

The No. 7-seeded Halep defeated unseeded Germany Andrea Petkovic 6-3, 6-3 in the Nurnberg, Germany final, winning her first title in her fourth final.

“Andrea beat me in Romania a few years ago and I’m happy I could win against her here today,” Halep said. “She played great and the atmosphere was great. It’s an unbelievable feeling to win my first WTA title.”

The wildcard Petkovic will also receive a wildcard at Wimbledon.

Hantuchova at the Aegon Classic defeated 16-year-old Croat sensation Donna Vekic 7-6(5), 6-4 in the final.

“I’m always so happy coming back here year after year, and it feels great to finally get the title,” Hantuchova said. “The first week on grass is always really demanding on the body, so I’m proud of how I made it through so many long matches throughout the week. And when I really needed to, I was tough mentally. Like in the match with [Francesca] Schiavone a few days ago, which was one of the most exciting matches of my career.”

It was her sixth career title and first on grass.

“It shows me I can still compete at the highest level, both physically and mentally,” Hantuchova said. “It’s actually so nice to see so many players from my generation doing so well, starting with Serena [Williams], obviously — what she’s done over the last few years is just amazing. And Francesca [Schiavone], Roberta [Vinci] — it’s nice to see the old way of playing still being so successful right now, and I’m glad to be a part of it.”

 


Also Check Out:
Serena Williams, Halep Win at WTA Finals; Tues. Schedule
Simona Halep: I’m Not Afraid To Play Serena Again!!!
Guess Who Recognized Simona Halep In New York City?
Halep Ends On High Note With TOC Title Over Stosur
Sharapova Outlasts Scrambling Halep for 2nd French Open Crown

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

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

126 Comments for Murray Joins Federer, Halep, Hantuchova as Title Winners

Humble Rafa Says:

Over the last 5 years, Humble Highness has won 8 grand slam titles…more than any active player.

#truthhurts#


James Says:

@Humble Rafa, it’s 9 if you include 2008, 7 if you don’t. Still the best among active players. Not to forget he also missed 3 GS to injury. His humble highness would have had more if the knee was stronger. Like his massive humility.


skeezer Says:

Yes, and 5 on ONE surface.

Btw, think we need to quit acknowledging HR as “Humble”?

Arrogance has never been so exposed.

Did you ever get a job or are u and your aka RFF still an unemployed comedian?

Oh and btw, how can you say “truth hurst” when you aren’t the truth.

#exposed
#badcomedykeepscomin
#hrhaswetdreamsofrafa
#shamster
#wannabee
#jealousofthegoat


Humble Rafa Says:

Skeeze,

This was your best day in 10 months and yet you are so bitter. Who lives around you?


skeezer Says:

^not you thank God.

What? You broke out of charactor?

#cracking…..
#getarealjob
#getanyjob
#forgetcomedy


nadalista Says:

Quit fighting and talk tennis guys, yes?

#Tennis


roy Says:

nadal has missed 2 australian opens outright, 1 he retired injured, 1 he pulled hamstring and played out a loss to ferrer. he has missed two wimbledons and was clearly injured for last year’s. he has missed one usopen and tore an ab for usopen in 09. he has missed 2 WTF to my knowledge.

in his career he has unquestionably been out of action for:
4 australian opens.
2 wimbledons.
1 usopen
2 wtf

and he is only 28 or whatever. that’s a lot of non clay majors missed. federer has missed none.
federer fans like to complain about nadal’s injuries, but really they should be thankful. it’s kept the slam count down by at least a couple.

”Yes, and 5 on ONE surface.”

the old ”cheap” slam wins argument.
you can cut it numerous ways.
”one dimensional” nadal has multiple slams on all surfaces. federer has multiple slams on only two.

but more importantly, in modern times clay is still a MAJOR surface, not a niche surface like grass. there are VASTLY more top players who are comfortable on clay than on grass because few people have significant experience on grass growing up.
when it comes time for wimbledon, countless top players over the years have suddenly become uncomfortable, almost tapping out in some cases, including ”aggressive” players such as davydenko,safin.
very few top players outside a couple of americans suddenly find themselves completely out of place at roland garros because of the surface.
the vast majority of modern players are well versed on clay.

what this means is that it is much easier for a person with a game suited to grass to win wimbledons than it is for a person with a game suited to clay to win roland garros.
if we’re trying to class the ”cheapest” surface to win slams on, it’s clearly grass in the modern era.


Giles Says:

@roy. Great post. Rafa is 27 btw. :-)


Alex Says:

What nonsesne.

”one dimensional” nadal has multiple slams on all surfaces. federer has multiple slams on only two.

Hahah nice try, the ONLY SLAM Nadal has more titles at is FO. Thats it!

You can phrase that any way you like, maybe helps you sleep at night, bottom line is Fed has better results on every surface exept clay.


Colin Says:

Roy, I’m not sure how the scenario you describe fits in with the career of Federer.

If as you say a majority of players are reasonably comfortable on clay, surely Roger, with his exceptional talent, ought to have done better against Nadal on that surface?

After all, the Spaniard learned to play on grass and hardcourt,


queen Says:

Skeezer u r the king of #. lol


queen Says:

Btw, Starnoud astrology predicts Nadal and Serena to win Wimbledon this year;) just sayin


Nirmal Kumar Says:

27 yrs considered to be a post peak period for tennis players, atleast for past 30 years. Most of the top players have played their best till 27 years.

But Rafa looks to be pretty young 27 yrs, considering the mileage he has already put on his body and peoples comment that he puts too much physically every point.

I can see Rafa go on and win GS comfortably atleast for next 3-4 years. But the end of the year would be the best period to judge. Not to take away anything from Rafa, but he has done what he has always been good at ie play unbelievable in clay.

If he can win either of Wimby or USO and end the year with WTF then we can rest assured he would be re writing lot of records which we thought would not be possible including taking over Roger’s slam record.


El Flaco Says:

roy Says:

————————————————–
It’s not some random event or bad luck that Nadal has injuries. It’s a result of his playing style.


Chichiback Says:

All the injury talks. I really do not think Rafa was ever injured. He was just taking a break of some sort. Haas was injured. Hewit was injured. Monfils was injured. Just my opinion.


James Says:

@Chichiback, right, who doesn’t wanna take a 7 month break in their prime, miss Slams one of which he could have won, eh? Any idea why he took such long breaks? Just curious.


Julia Says:

@James…don’t forget he also skipped the Olympics which he has already won a Gold medal in SINGLES tennis.

I see we still have the faithful few who are always trying to act like clay is non-worthy of counting as a tennis surface. Why don’t you look further and maybe you’ll see that fed learned to play on CLAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


grendel Says:

roy puts up an efficient “legal” case for Nadal. Lawyers, remember, are not concerned with truth, only with winning the case. A scientist or statistician, say, is obliged to look at all sides of the argument – a lawyer must never do that (which maybe why one of Shakespear’s characters splendidly remarked:”let’s kill all the lawyers”) except in the sense he must anticipate his opponents’ moves.

El Flaco has succinctly put the case for the opposition where injuries are concerned, but there is more to say. Why do you think Haas is doing so well right now? Precisely because his terrible injuries (and forced time out to look after his parents)had the effect of saving his legs, and possibly general store of energy and enthusiasm, for later in his career. If Nadal has lost opportunities to win grand slams, it is quite likely he will gain further opportunities to win some down the line which he would not have originally had. He would be worn out.

” federer has missed none.” True – but has be been fully fit in all of them? That is a contentious issue, but there is certainly doubt. And even today, Rusedski has expressed concern about Federer’s long term back issues – he feels he is not moving as well as he should be. I don’t know, but I do suspect blanket statements – lawyer type statements – one way or the other.

roy presents an interesting argument w.r.t. grass. But once again, we can see the hand of the lawyer at work. For example: there was a time when 3 of the grand slams were played on grass. The reasons for changing this had more to do with economics, I believe, than tennis. In this sense, Wimbledon is doing all tennis fans a favour in keeping grass. History is not quite abolished. Meanwhile, if grass provides (for economic reasons) a minority version of tennis, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. It forces players to adapt, and those who refuse are sometimes chickenhearted. I regret to say Safin falls under this category. He actually had the makings of a great grass courtplayer, but he persuaded himself, against all the evidence, that he was not equipped to play well on the surface.

Furthermore, we all know that grass has changed. There has been a marked trend to “sameness”.Would Nadal have got his 2 Wimbledons on the kind of surface Sampras triumphed on? You couldn’t rule him out, with his special brand of determination and skill – but he was still done a big favour.

“what this means is that it is much easier for a person with a game suited to grass to win wimbledons than it is for a person with a game suited to clay to win roland garros.” That pesky lawyer has been at work again. Actually, on grass strange things can happen. A Sampras can be beaten by a Bastle, a Nadal by a Rosol, huge servers, emerging from remote hinterlands, can wreak terrible damage. Clay, on the other hand, punishes the merely violent and smiles on anyone who has unique skills. We should never downplay Nadal’s extraordinary achievements on clay. But on other surfaces, he does come down to earth – still great, but not uniquely so.


Okiegal Says:

Everyone is injured except Rafa…….yeah, right.


Steve 27 Says:

Andy is my candidate number 1 to win Wimbledon. If not Rafa, would be happy to be the first Briton to win it since Fred Perry in 1936.


El Flaco Says:

Excellent points Grendel. At some point age becomes a factor regardless of how much wear and tear you have on the tour, but I agree that Haas’ legs are definitely benefiting from the time off due to injury. Haas has 821 ATP matches under his belt while Nadal has 750 despite the 8 year age difference. Fed has played 1109 matches which works out to about an extra 4 years on tour compared to Haas.


steve-o Says:

Nadal has never been injured, not any more than any other top player. I simply don’t believe it.

What are we on, “injury” comeback 10,000? In 2009 it was chronic degenerative knee problems, which have apparently resolved without surgery, unlike any other chronic degenerative knee problems in athletic history. In 2010 AO it was some unrelated knee problems.

Last year he was “injured” at IW and Miami where he lost and then skipped out, respectively. Then the “injury” went away at MC and Rome and RG only to come back in the RG final and then when he lost to Rosol. How very convenient for his “injuries” to go away when he wins, and magically appear just when he loses.

No, it’s absurd to believe that Nadal has ever been seriously injured in his career. Seriously injured players do not come back and make 9 straight finals and win seven. That simply doesn’t happen. If it happens, it means he wasn’t injured.

The truth is that his style is so physically taxing and inefficient that it is nearly impossible for him to maintain absolute peak level throughout a whole season. This is different from serious injury. It’s just the normal fluctuations any athlete has.

Federer too goes through these normal ups and downs. But because his game is less physical and more varied, he can still get around lots of players even on an off-day. But if Nadal’s level fluctuates, even a little bit, he is vulnerable on grass and hard courts. And this vulnerability grows as he gets older.

Nadal’s fans gnash their teeth and wail that he’s been kept from realizing his potential by his “injuries.” I disagree–given his extremely grueling and inefficient style, he’s maxed out his potential and done pretty much as well as he could have expected to do, perhaps even better than he could have reasonably expected to do.

It’s just one more example of how the Nadal camp manipulates people’s expectations, by creating this meme that if not for the cruel fates who inflicted so many injuries on “poor little Rafa,” he would have won sooooooo many more Grand Slams and easily broken Federer’s records.

Nonsense. The “cruel fates” have been far, far kinder to Nadal than to many other players–Del Potro, for instance, who lost a whole year to wrist injury and took another year to climb back into the ranks of the elite, or Ancic, whose career was ended by mono, or Haas who was in a car accident when he was contending for world #1, etc.

And I love how Nadal fans are so sure he would have won every tournament he skipped, to the point where they assign him the title in absentia and put the absurd “asterisk” next to the tournament any time he isn’t in the final.

How do you KNOW he would have won? How do you know he wouldn’t have suffered MORE early-round defeats than he has? How do Nadal fans KNOW these things? Any Nadal fans willing to explain this to me?

I mean, I could spout hypotheticals too, like if Federer hadn’t gotten mono in ’08 he would have been #1 7 years in a row, or if Richard Krajicek had never been born, Sampras would have won 8 Wimbledons in a row.

I could wish for impossible things, like if Federer were eternally youthful and could play forever. And I could say “if only these things were true, he would have won ten times as many Grand Slams.” It means nothing, just as the “if only Nadal hadn’t had so many injuries” lament means nothing.

His fans think he’s mentally strong and physically weak. In fact, the exact opposite is true–he’s physically strong, mentally weak. The loss to Rosol was so damaging to him mentally that he quit tennis for seven months to rebuild his shattered confidence. And then when he came back he had to play tons of clay tournaments to get his confidence back.

Indeed, since he came back he’s played only ONE non-clay tournament, and that at Indian Wells, which is so slow and high-bouncing that it might as well be clay. He has made the semis eight years running so we know he does very well there.

He skipped Miami and is skipping Halle because he knows he would have gotten beaten there and it would have tarnished the aura of invincibility he needs. And he will probably skip Montreal and certainly Cincinnati, and most likely the indoor hard-court season.

I think from now on he will pretty much skip all tournaments save the clay season, IW, and Grand Slams. He just can’t risk losing anymore. He will claim “injury” to get out of the warm up tournaments and then enter the Grand Slams like nothing ever happened. This is, of course, totally gaming the system because he’s obligated to play the Masters as a top player. But when did rules ever matter to Nadal? Those are for the little people, not for him.


Simon Says:

Grendel:

You have to stop giving too much credit to trolls like roy. The guy hardly as an IQ of a rat’s behind, much less that of a lawyer.

The premise that rafa got injured as if he was involved in some unfortunate accident of that is absolute drivel. The guy is often injured because he is a defensive clay-courter who spends majority of his life fetching balls that shot-makers like Djokovic/Federer hit.

It reflects very bad on a person’s tennis knowledge and their IQ if they cannot see why Federer/Sampras/Nole are least bothered by injuries in their career [nole has had illness and federer immunity issues] but defensive players like murray, rafa are more injury prone because they revel in ball-fetching. [frustratingly in murray's case, as unlike rafa, he actually has the variety to become a shot-maker, unfortunately his training in Spain has had a very detrimental effect on the style of his game. if murray trained in germany like Nole, he would have won atleast a couple of Wimbledons and Year end titles and maybe even a australian open]

I wonder who was the dolt who sent murray to train in spain. The LTA or whoever made the decision might just have cost Britain a home-grown champ. Let us hope murray can fight off his own defensive mind-set and the obvious and well-known court-slowing of wimbledon.

I am a bigger fan of Fed/Nole/Delpotro/Tsonga/Gasquet but I wish Andy would a wimbledon, so these success-starved british sports world will stop their brit-mania in wimbledon – going on since henman’s times.

They will not be winning a football world cup any time soon, so I hope Andy throws them a bone and wins a Slam in UK and not some puny 250 tournament.


James Says:

“The loss to Rosol was so damaging to him mentally that he quit tennis for seven months to rebuild his shattered confidence.”

@steve-o, hahaha one loss and Nadal chickens out? lol I wonder why he didn’t chicken out when he lost 7 times in a row to Novak Djokovic. Maybe Nadal after all isn’t like you? And what when Nadal wins some more non clay Slams?


nadalista Says:

Of course it’s that troll Rafa’s fault Murray only has one Slam to his name so far. Why not, he is to blame for everything that’s wrong with the ATP…….

#DastardlySpaniards


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Hes won 12 GS,4 of which have been off clay including an Olympic singles gold medal,theres only two men in history with more,maybe he doesnt have the talent of Roger or Novak,but surely that alone must tell people that he must be doing something right,or maybe im just some airhead Rafa fan whos an idiot for believing him when he says hes injured?i just dont buy that someone as competitive as he would take so long off without good reason,but thats my perogative,everyone is entitled to their own opinion.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Simon sorry no offence but did you not notice how well the Brits did at the Olympics last year?


Margot Says:

@Simon
Andy sent himself to Spain. He’d met Rafa at junior tournaments and found out he was practising with top 20 players, while he Andy was stuck in the hinterland playing against his brother.
British weather aided the decision as well. QED Queens.


James Says:

oh Simon, what have Spain and Rafa done to you! I hope it’s not the 20-10 goat beating.


James Says:

@Margot, isn’t it funny how Rafa Nadal and Andy Murray possibly had similar training in Spain, yet Rafa has 12 Slams to Andy’s 1? So I don’t know if it’s to do with the training. I mean even Nole has just 6 to Rafa’s 12.


Simon Says:

@Margot:

That was a bad decision. For those british people’s sake, I hope andy overcomes his perennial defensive mindset. Federer mentioned this in 2008 when he said, Andy will not win slams playing his passive game. Guess what? 5years down, andy is still 1-5 in slams, while his rival nole has just taken the tennis world by force. Even a lesser talented player like rafa has had more success outside clay than murray and that is sad. Not as sad as gasquet/monfils but safin-like sadness. Then again safin had no home-slams to win.

There is a reason why most spaniards other than rafa have achieved 0 outside clay. Most of Rafa’s achievements, you can credit to uncle toni. Even now, you get the feeling rafa would be like a fish out of water, without uncle toni in the box doing his illegal coaching, as commentators mentioned during French Open semifinal


andrea Says:

nice win for fed yesterday even though it wasn’t a taxing draw.

in five years, once fed and nadal are gone and/or in the twilight, i wonder which players everyone will be ranting about on this site.


grendel Says:

steve-o

“His [Nadal's] fans think he’s mentally strong and physically weak. In fact, the exact opposite is true–he’s physically strong, mentally weak”. Do you read G.K Chesterton by any chance – he loved making paradoxical statements of this kind?

This is an eccentric opinion, but none the worse for that. I’m not sure if you are right about the physical side – there was a poster here a few months ago, ‘fraid I’ve forgotten her name – who said that Nadal had some congenital problems with the knee from an early age. I debated with her, suggesting that this weakness could actually have acted as a spur. Weaknesses can have that effect, and she lukewarmly agreed with me.

However that may be, the concept of “mental strength” is an awfully woolly one, because it can encompass so many different things. There is no doubt that Nadal is in some respects weak, but that isn’t in itself saying much, since you can say that about anyone. Still, take his press conferences – all such things tend to be exercises in kiddology for public figures generally. To look for truth in them is naïve, and this is particularly the case with Nadal. More than most players, he is pretty calculating in his public remarks.

But on the tennis courts, where it counts, it is surely true that Nadal exhibits a particular brand of mental strength which is very unusual. That is, he can maintain focus for an unusually extended period. Furthermore, a hugely significant aspect of this is that he can concentrate on the tennis even when he is down. That is, he can focus on the tennis right now and not on what has gone wrong. That is a gift (not an attainment – is it therefor a mental strength? don’t know – these are tricky waters)and I believe Nadal was being honest when he singled it out as his greatest weapon. It seems to me plainly true.


James Says:

Rafa is mentally and physically strong.


Simon Says:

“Furthermore, a hugely significant aspect of this is that he can concentrate on the tennis even when he is down. ”

I have a question, though. If Rafa is this Zen master, why did he get into being down in the 1st place? I would think a smart person would focus his energies on not getting down in the 1st place.

The real truth is, certain individuals focus on not letting things get into a crisis aka Federer. Others like Rafa/Nole can only get their head together when things are already in a crisis. I am thinking most smart and capable people would prefer the Federer route.

All this “theories” about mental strength will not explain why Rafa has been bageled by Federer on all 3 surfaces. No player 5years older than Federer bageled federer when federer was in his prime at 25years. To me, the ultimate tennis warrior is hewitt and look at what all that mental strength helped him when Federer, the force of nature hit him like a tornado/tsunami in the 2004 USO double bageling him. Hewitt was the 2nd best player on the american hardcourts, that summer, so he was far from being a rosol or a zverev. He ended that year no.3 in the world.


Giles Says:

Poor fed. What happened to him in Wimby 2011 against Tsonga? Two sets to love up and he lost the match. Pathetic result for the so-called Goat. Hahaha.


Wilfried Says:

@Grendel
Concentration might be a factor of intelligence but in my view not so much of mental-psychological strength.
Also you seem to have missed Steve’s point, I think.
Because what Steve was trying to say I think is the following: Nadal has a hard time to deal with losses from players whom he doesn’t expect to lose from. That’s why it takes him considerably more time to digest a loss from Roger Federer than it takes him to accept one from Novak Djokovic, and a fortiori an even longer time to deal with an unexpectedly loss like the one from a player like L.Rosol.


James Says:

@Wilfried, hasn’t Rafa lost to Rosol like players before? Don’t know why he hasn’t spend half his career crying over those 1 loss.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Grendel nice to see you back again,and a great post too,you have an uncanny knack of been able to read between the lines of any given situation,while still remaining objective,and never been swayed by emotional bias.


James Says:

@Giles, well, according to a tennis great Mats Wilander, the Goat has “no balls” when playing a certain “one surface player” :D


Giles Says:

@James. Hahaha. Well done Mats Wilander for having the “balls” to make that statement. He is right of course!


gonzalowski Says:

Simon, you don’t believe half of the things you say… I hope.
The problem is that you’re not funny, as others


grendel Says:

Wilfried – whether or not concentration is designated as a mental strength doesn’t matter. The existence of something real can hardly be affected by what people choose to call it. The ability to concentrate for long periods is obviously an asset, though. Quite often you see people playing Nadal who do very well against him for a couple of sets – but they can’t keep it up. A good case in point is the first round at RG. There is also the question of a failure of nerve, I presume this comes into it.

I agree, by the way, that Nadal finds it harder to digest losses than his rivals. This is a disagreeable trait or an understandable human frailty, depending on your point of view. It can also be either a weakness or a strength. So far as I can see, with Nadal it tends to be a strength – he seems to use this fear as a spur. It seems strange to think of fear of loss as being a motivator (rather than an inhibitor), but with some people that does seem to be the case. I have no idea why Nadal should be like this, but that’s how I read him, anyway.

Alison – if I may call you that – nice to see you. I do like your new name. It’s both kind of sexy in a sweet way (sweet in a sexy way?) – but also, do I detect a hint of gentle self-mockery – you know, “ex chic”…Groan, groan, sorry about that. What is it about puns…..


steve-o Says:

@grendel: Never read Chesterton, although have heard high praise for him from Borges.

Regarding Nadal: he can do a perfect imitation of a machine, yes. He can repeat, mechanically, simple actions over and over again for hours when other people would get bored. That is certainly an ability.

But it comes at a price. He ain’t very bright. He is, quite literally, thoughtless. There’s not much going on upstairs. If there were, it would interfere with his ability to be a machine. He is deliberately kept that way by his uncle.

If he loses to someone he doesn’t expect to lose to, it damages him mentally. Because he is not really a robot, but still a human being, thought–hateful, unwelcome thought–announces its presence. Thought threatens to destroy that machine-like quality without which Nadal is nothing.

That’s why Uncle Toni kept him out for seven months, to wipe the hard drive clean and restore it to “factory condition,” so to speak. The state of mindlessness had to be restored.

He’s an empty vessel that has been filled with whatever content Uncle Toni pleases to fill it with. There is no room left over for a person there–creating a winning machine took up all the available space.

With regards to what happens in press conferences: with Federer, there is only a human being, there is no mask at all–that’s what makes him so remarkable. He is not pretending to be someone he’s not, he’s simply himself.

With Djokovic there is a human being, wearing a certain mask to make him marketable, etc. Sometimes the mask slips and you see the human being underneath–a bit of a smartass, sarcastic, sometimes yawning when he’s bored with the absurdity of the whole media thing and wishing he were somewhere else, more clever than he likes to let on but not quite as clever as he thinks, etc.

With Nadal there is only a mask, without a person underneath. The mask can therefore assume whatever form Toni needs it to assume. Whether it be iron-willed “warrior” or burning hot hunk of Spanish love or polite obedient little Boy Scout or detached philosopher–anything.

It’s like a movie screen. As long as the projector is on, you are dazzled by all the beautiful images and colored lights dancing across it. Turn off the projector, and the reality is revealed: a blank void with no form or shape or quality of its own.


James Says:

^^ man, you made me lol
you must be Charles Xavier! :D


jane Says:

Okay steve-o: now I have to ask. Have you read Baudrillard and the stages of simulacra (or phases of the image)? Sure sounds like it. ;)


steve-o Says:

@jane: No, but I did read the Society of the Spectacle by Debord. I’ve forgotten most of it (couldn’t make heads or tails of it) but I suppose some of it might have sunk in subconsciously.


jane Says:

Well, in your last post you’ve quite nailed a lot of what Baudrillard says, even if unknowingly!


Steve 27 Says:

Rafa or Andy this time, the others…to NY this summer.


skeezer Says:

grendel and steve-o

miss you guys. hope you post more pre- wimby.

_______

gonzalowski,

read your posts. Sorry I gave you a bad time in the past. You are a fair poster and want to say good luck to your fav at Wimby.

#8FO’snodenying


harry Says:

grendel — i agree with skeeze that it will be great to see you posting more often :-) Yeah, I agree with you about Rafa & his mental strength [ie his fear of a loss drives his motivation to perform even better]. mat4 said something similar [although he phrased it differently]…


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Grendel lol thankyou,self mockery perhaps a lttle bit,but i got bored with plain old boring Alison,and my new name is much more in keeping with what im about in the real world :)..


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

^But i dont mind people calling me Alison if they wish^.


Margot Says:

@ steve-0
That was very interesting, though thought you were very harsh on Rafa, personal preferences showing? and quite insightful/amusing about Nole, more neutral? Seem to remember you don’t like Andy, forgive if wrong, so very glad you didn’t attempt any analysis of him….;)
@hippy chicky
Hmm, don’t think Americans “get” our British prediliction for “self mockery.” Think it’s probably against the 5th or something…;)


Colin Says:

What with all the psychology and literature, I have rather lost the thread of this thread, so to speak, but I think it was Simon who was talking about Murray’s defensive mindset. This is old news, and to some extent out of date.

This past week, at Queen’s, Andy’s success was down to the fact that he is considerably less passive nowadays. There are still moments when one wishes for a bit more aggression, but by and large he’s improved a lot in this area. Whether this is the Lendl influence I don’t know, but anyway – better late than never.

Margot, I suspect “self-mockery” is considered un-American, and it’s probably forbidden by the Constitution!


the DA Says:

@Margot – “forgive if wrong”

You’re not.


Margot Says:

@the DA
Lol thought so….glad topic avoided then…;)


Nadalista Says:

Careful @steve-o, in your quest to discredit Rafa, you are making Uncle T appear quite brilliant. Have a sneaking suspicion that was not your intention……

Just saying……..


Giles Says:

Steve-o. Psycho analyst supreme!! (NOT). Sounds like he has taken snippets from various material he has managed to dig up and applied the same to Nadal.
Would like to see you psycho analyse the so- called goat, in your own time of course. Give you a chance to dig up the best material possible!
#20-10
#OlympicSinglesGold


Giles Says:

@nadalista. Steve-o says Rafa is not very bright! Lol


Nadalista Says:

@Giles, even funnier is how he ends up making Uncle Toni look like a genius, which we all know is sacrilege in that wing of Fedfandom…….

Now he has to redeem himself by penning an anti-Uncle Toni post. So now he will have 2 idiots running rings around the Tour so far in 2013! What does that say about the Tour you wonder? I’m sure the Psycho-analyst supreme will tell us! Hehehe!

#RollOnWimby!


grendel Says:

steve-o

Uncle Toni as Svengali – and you mean it literally, not merely as a destructive analogy. You have made your case eloquently. I’ve always had a certain hobby horse, and that is my belief that we are all tribalists, whether we like it or not (personally I don’t). True in religion and politics, true in competing visions of life, and true in sport as well. So we kind of see what we want to see. Oddly, intelligence is of no use here. Because it becomes a tool, a powerful tool perhaps, in the hands of the tribalist, if that’s the right word. This is a conundrum, and I don’t see any way out of it. The more you struggle, the tighter become the bonds. But – that’s just my outlook.


grendel Says:

Further to the above, andrea says:”in five years, once fed and nadal are gone and/or in the twilight, i wonder which players everyone will be ranting about on this site.”

Well, it used to be Federer and Sampras. The mudslinging that went on between the followers of these two was easily a match for anything today. There is something special about these particular rivalries, because in both cases records were/are threatened.

Whenever that is the case, expect the temperature to rise.


Okiegal Says:

The tennis commentators would beg to differ with anyone who says Rafa isn’t very bright…….they are all in agreement that he is probably the smartest player on the circuit. Not being a tennis player, I wouldn’t pick up on that. They’re always talking about how he takes cares of problems that he faces in matches when he might lose a set. His mental toughness , I think , is his greatest asset. But I will take Cahill, the 2 Macs, and Brad’s word for it, cause I’m sure they know what they’re talking about……whether you like um’ or not……they know tennis.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Steve O have to agree with Margot,although im not one of those Rafa fans who believes hes perfect by a long chalk,neither do i think that about any of the others either,as i dont believe that such a thing exists,you dont have to like him or the way he plays his tennis,but i thought you were very harsh on Rafa as Margot says,to the point where you are attacking him personally,surely what counts is the way plays his tennis,not his personality(or lack of)?its a shame that you paint the guy so negatively when his only crime happens to be playing tennis.


Giles Says:

Rafa’s only crime is whipping Fed’s @ss time and time again!
#20-10
#MassacreInRome
#LiveWithIt


skeezer Says:

^His only crime in Tennis? Lol. I could roll with that one but I will refrain.


James Says:

@Giles, hahaha a crime that’s turned a lot of Fedfans anti-Nadal.


steve-o Says:

@hippy chic: who says I hate Nadal? I just want to be clear, that’s all.

You can like Nadal in spite of his malingering, his constant rule-breaking (being fined for on-court coaching, going over time), his poor sportsmanship (yelling and fist-pumping in his opponents’ faces, shoulder-checking Rosol), and his blatant attempts to change the rules of the tour just to favor him (demanding more clay tournaments, a two-year ranking system, a shorter season, and now wanting to be seeded higher than his ranking at Wimbledon). You can ignore the large mountain of circumstantial evidence that suggests that he’s roided out of his mind and insist on giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I have no problem with your choosing to do all that.

But I have a problem when people acknowledge those things, and then continue to say he’s nice, or a good sportsman. Nice people and good sportsmen do not consistently engage in the patterns of behavior that Nadal does.

Words have meanings, and I don’t like it when people try to change them around.

his only crime happens to be playing tennis.

Crime is a strong word–and it’s your word, which I never used. But he does consistently break the rules, as I said. Also he demands constantly that the rules be changed in ways that suit him specifically. And I object to that.

Out of curiosity, what DO you like about Nadal? It’s obvious what guys like nadalista and Gilles want–they just want to see someone’s a$$ get stomped, especially if it’s Federer’s. They’re like pro wrestling fans who want to see a giant, gaudy, loud spectacle of people pounding the crap out of each other. Or teenagers who watched Fight Club too many times and think that blowing things up is the coolest thing. Nihilists, in short. For people like that, Nadal delivers in spades.

But you don’t seem to be like that. So what do you get out of following Nadal?


Giles Says:

@James. I posted a vid of Rafa practising on the thread “Rafa expected to be seeded 5th”. Did you catch it?


Giles Says:

Oy Steve-o. When did Rafa say he wanted to be seeded higher than his ranking? Show me. I do pity your types with all your hatred and bilge spilling over at the mere mention of Nadal’s name. I’ve got news for you, he ain’t going away so learn to live with that scenario. Nasty little man!!
#20-10
#MassacreInRome


James Says:

@Giles, yes I have. Glad he’s there and getting a few days practice. I’m more confident of his chances at Wimby now.

And I wouldn’t take a steve-o too seriously. Read his posts. The guy sounds like he thinks of himself as a telepath or something lol
now that Rafa is back and dominating the men’s tour (so far), expect a lot of haters coming from several fans of some top players. Most neutral tennis fans love Nadal for he brings to the tennis to the court, his athletism and never say die attitude.


Giles Says:

@James. Ok then, I will take your advice and just ignore that nutter’s posts. #TakesAllTypesToMakeThisWorld


James Says:

@Giles, It will get very interesting if Rafa wins this Wimbledon. I don’t know what all these anti-Nadal posters will be posting then.


Ben Pronin Says:

“Most neutral tennis fans love Nadal for he brings to the tennis to the court, his athletism and never say die attitude.”

I can only assume you have conducted a poll that lead you to this conclusion.


Giles Says:

@James. Yes, very interesting indeed. Will they even appear or will they retreat to their little cubby holes? Lol


James Says:

Ben, I’m a well traveled man. And most tennis fans I’ve met do enjoy watching Rafa. His butt picking may be the only thing most fans don’t appreciate. There’s a reason why his popularity is just a little behind Roger Federer.


steve-o Says:

@grendel: you have read my mind! I have used that description of Toni Nadal myself.

If he is a genius, he’s an evil one. Like all bandits and warlords, the secret of his success lies merely in his sheer ruthlessness, his willingness to go further than any civilized person expects. For a while this works simply because people aren’t used to someone so ruthless and they’re caught by surprise. Then eventually people catch on, and then the end for the bandit/warlord is messy.

In so many walks of life, people are tribal–in politics, in finance, in religion. And this often leads to disaster as people adopt rigid positions that don’t reflect a complex and nuanced reality.

But in sport, a greater degree of tribalism can be allowed, because there are fewer dangerous consequences. In fact, rabid partisanship is part of the fun of being a sports fan.

In the case of Federer and Nadal, there is a clear side of light and one of dark. It cannot be any more Manichean. The division is virtually metaphysical. There is no ambiguity whatsoever.

And yet those very same people who are so fanatical and absolutist about all those other matters in which there are fine distinctions and shades of gray, fall all over themselves trying to find nuance in the Federer-Nadal rivalry, where there simply is none to be found.

Here the absolutist position really is the only reasonable one to take, and yet people spend so much energy trying to stake out some kind of middle ground.

Why this is so is really beyond my understanding. Perhaps you have a better idea than I.

Federer is about tennis, with winning being a mere by-product, while Nadal is about winning (at all costs), with tennis an afterthought.

Those like nadalista actually understand very clearly the nature of the Federer-Nadal duality. They have long since dispensed with any futile attempts to find nonexistent nuance or compromise, and eagerly adopted an absolutist position, coming down firmly on the side of dark: what does any of it matter as long as their guy gets his paws on the trophy?

Nadal’s beating the brains out of everyone (at least in the carefully selected tournaments he plays, of course). And if life is all about beating the brains out of the next guy to come your way, then nothing else matters. To hell with beauty, to hell with enjoyment, to hell with sportsmanship, to hell with all of that.

If that’s what you’re about, why hide it? Thump your chest like a gorilla and revel in it.


James Says:

@Giles, some fair posters will come to congratulate Rafa and fans. Others will come and post something like ‘he was lucky because he didn’t meet x or y player!’
well, he may or may not win but he’ll have a good tournament this time.


Giles Says:

@James. Looks like he is raring to go.
Vamos King!


Ben Pronin Says:

James, I would love to know where you’re traveling because I haven’t seen what you’re describing anywhere. Define “just a little behind”. Nadal, and everyone else, is very much behind Federer in terms of popularity in the general sports world. Federer is still synonymous with tennis, Nadal is not. The casual viewer might like Nadal, but his popularity isn’t “a little behind” Federer’s.


Giles Says:

@James. Let’s hope for good weather, hot, dry and sunny and more importantly good health for Rafa.


Giles Says:

Allow me to butt in, fed has been around much longer than Rafa hence the popularity deficit, IMO.


Alex Says:

^
LMAO Giles, “popularity deficit”.


James Says:

Ben, would US, Canada, UK, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, Kenya, South Africa do?

I’m not claiming Rafa to be as popular as Roger. But he isn’t a thousand miles behind him as you’d like to think.

You might wanna read this:

http://www.perfect-tennis.co.uk/most-popular-tennis-player/


Giles Says:

Hi Alex. How are you doing? Are you well?


James Says:

note: the research for the most popular tennis player link I posted was done in December 2012, when Rafa was already out for months. Not that it would have made a big difference, still it would have helped his case a little more.


Alex Says:

:), very well thx, hot weather here, how are you?


Giles Says:

Yep, am fine thanx. Looking forward to Wimby.


James Says:

@Giles, Roger has also achieved much more than Rafa has so far. He’s also a better english speaker.
If Rafa were a Brit, no question who’d be more popular between the two. The British media (sorry Alison or any Brit on the forum) would overhype his every achievement and annoint him the GOAT already.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Steve O i happen to like the guy because hes an amazing tennis player its as simple as that for me really,however i repeat i do not think hes perfect,how many times do i have to say it?however is anybody?is Andy?is Novak?is Roger?no because there aint no such thing,what is the point of me being here?am i not allowed to have an opinion?


Julia Says:

steve-zero sounds like skeezer’s brother from the amount of negativity towards Nadal. Facts mean nothing to him.

There are many people who like Rafa and that will not change no matter what the haters try to say. Personally, the first match I ever saw of Rafa or Fed was the Wimby 2008 final. I had not heard of either one of them, had no clue who they were, but as I watched, I liked Rafa’s play each point like it’s the last point mentality. His never give up attitude. I became a fan for life. Had nothing against fed until I started coming on here and “met” some of his fans. It’s the fans that are the problem, not fed.


grendel Says:

steve-o -@ “…Nadal’s beating the brains out of everyone…”

You might have been interested in Serena Williams interview following her demolition of poor Errani in RG semi. She said she liked Errani (lot of fun) and admired her attitude (spunky) but couldn’t afford to let such feelings affect her tennis. In short, you had to drop all personal considerations and go out and win as quickly as you could – the implication being that if you started playing gentle, you might let the player in and actually lose. I suspect Willimas’ fellow competitors would, for the most part, endorse this viewpoint.

It’s difficult. Do you remember the poster Von? She reacted violently when Federer thrashed Santoro at the AO. She was convinced it was a thoroughly sadistic performance. I was astonished at her tirade, because for one thing, it was obvious that Santoro didn’t mind (or if he did, he was damn good at hiding it). It was an occasion of smiles all round and meanwhile some enjoyable tennis from both players.

Nevertheless, it is unlikely that Von was alone in her reaction. A lesson here is that the impressions we have are subjective and, as from person to person, unpredictable. There are plenty of gentle Nadal fans who won’t relish the idea of their hero beating up on his opponents, so they must have a different vision of their man than you have or I have. I don’t mean anything goes, I just think getting to the truth of the matter is not so easy.

In your earlier post to hippy chick you write:”Nice people and good sportsmen do not consistently engage in the patterns of behavior that Nadal does.”
Leaving aside the question of whether your comments are just (but not to be a complete coward, I’ll admit I think some are) I don’t agree that to be a ruthless player or bad sportsman means you can’t be a nice person (whatever that is). In my experience, the Jekyll and Hyde component in peoples’ makeup is surprisingly common. People can be vile and selfless and kind, too. Funny old world….


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Grendel great post,i wish i had half of the skill you had when it comes to debating,my skills are nil and void,i think i come across as a bit of a klutz in that department.


grendel Says:

absolute rubbish, Tennis hippy chic. You come across as completely sincere and with your own very personal writing style – it is immediately identifiable, and you can’t say that for everybody by any means. Also, you don’t go on and on like some of us do – the art of brevity is not simple, and you get it just right. There’s a number of posters like that, Scineram, Volley and others – people who don’t say much, but you listen to what they say.


steve-o Says:

@hippy chic: fair enough about how you think he’s an amazing tennis player. We all have our preferences.

But I do have to make one objection on how you’re conflating two very different things. There’s a big difference between not being perfect, and consistently doing things that are wrong.

Suppose you have three people. One stole a piece of gum. Another stole a car. The third is a mob boss who has an entire outfit of criminals under him stealing millions of dollars worth of property every year.

Do you lump them all together and say “None of them are perfect, treat ‘em all the same?” No, the law does not do that–in fact, it treats them quite differently, and that difference can be very drastic.

Has any of those other players you mention ever gotten physical with an opponent? Do they systematically seek to slant the tour in their favor? Do they consistently flout the rules?

The answer is no. Nadal goes much further than any of them do, and does so in a much more organized and thoroughgoing manner–like the mob boss.

He’s being singled out for his behavior because his behavior is singularly egregious. Not because somehow he’s being unfairly persecuted.

If the mob boss were to say “Why are you coming down so hard on me? Those other guys aren’t perfect either! Live and let live, ya know?” that would be wrong. The mob boss is singled out because his behavior is worse than the others’ by many degrees, because he commits wrong acts on a much larger scale than the others.

So with Nadal–at least in my opinion. And am I not allowed to have an opinion?


Okiegal Says:

Well, Rafa is behind Roger a wee bit according to the post above……..but who is counting?? Not me, for sure. He is brilliant on the tennis court, nervous tics and all. Can not wait for Wimby to get started.

Vamos, Rafa!!


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Thankyou Grendel i think lol.
Steve O point taken but two wrongs dont make a right,Novak has himself done some stupid things though,that even his fans have glossed over,the gun incident,the swearing at the crowd recently,even Barry Cowan commented on that,and his team gyrating on the roof of that car after that win in Miami in 2011,im all for been a fair poster,and as i said i dont think Rafas perfect by a long chalk,but its the double standards that p*ss me off is all,ill leave it at that,it seems im on a hiding to nothing.


metan Says:

LOL.we now have mafia boss mob plus gorilla assertion @ Steve O . Live wouldn’t be better than stay in the jungle.

#iamnotrafahaterjustscrewhim


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Steve O also just interested in your take on what Margot said on your feelings about Murray?


steve-o Says:

@hippy chic: I don’t think there is a double standard at all. This is the fundamental point on which we differ.

I think people went from phase 1–complete denial that Nadal systematically engages in unsportsmanlike behavior and rulebreaking–to phase 5–the totally unfounded belief that everyone is just as bad as he is and they are no different than he.

It’s swinging from one silly extreme to the opposite silly extreme, and both extremes are equally spurious.

It’s like if Nadal is found to be a little dirty then everyone has to be dragged down right into the mud along with him, they’re not allowed to be clean. If he can’t have something, then no one is allowed to have it.

That’s how his tennis works, that’s how he works, and it’s how many of his fans work. It’s sheer nihilism–the collapsing of everything towards the lowest common denominator, the devaluation of what is valuable.

And I rebel against this tendency. Not everything is the same. It’s not all just one giant mud puddle.

There’s a line from King Lear, “I’ll teach you differences.” That expresses what I am trying to say.


TennisZod Says:

steve-o, great post. You are telling truth about Nadal. So many people think Rafa is nice and humble. No he is very bad sportsman unlike Nole and Roger. He play dirty like the red dirt he love. You are right in calling him a tennis mafia.
So you are Nole fan or Roger fan? I ask because Nole fans and Roger fans speak only truth about the Spanish bull.


steve-o Says:

@hippy chic: if you want my take on Murray: he’s the domestic type. Not the sort to enjoy jetsetting and hobnobbing and being a celebrity. Very attached to his mom, very private sort of person.

He’s a bit of a case of arrested development–enjoys boyish hobbies like go-karting and video games, even in his mid twenties. I’d expect a model plane or two in his bedroom, or some such thing. He’s not a bad boy like Djokovic; I don’t think he does anything too wild on weekends.

That’s why he seems to many not to have the manner of a champion–Federer has his naturally regal demeanor, Djokovic has his bad-boy swagger, Nadal has his carefully crafted “warrior” image. But Murray has none of those things. It’s a bit of a puzzle.

He was one of those boy genius types who came to the conclusion that they were especially clever at a very young age, and it took him a very long time to learn that there were others as clever, if not cleverer than he, and that he was just one among many clever people.

Part of this was no doubt due to his being coached by his mother–who, being to all appearances a very doting mother, probably did a lot to reinforce the idea of Murray’s specialness.

He relied on his natural gifts, quick hands and anticipation to baffle his opponents with changes of pace, rather than learn point construction, which hindered the progress of his career.

There’s quite a big chip on his shoulder–it’s part and parcel of the boy genius thing–he is sometimes not quite aware of how much it influences his actions. This is one of the sources of his competitive drive.


steve-o Says:

@Zod: I’m a Federer fan.


TennisZod Says:

I knew it if not Nole you like Federer. Federer real tennis great player and great sportsman. I dont know why people like Nadal. He dont play good tennis, maybe clay tennis, and is bad sportsman.


steve-o Says:

Regarding Murray again: he has a strong desire for legitimacy. He wants to prove that with his idiosyncratic style he can be accepted by the highest levels of the tennis establishment.

This is why he is sometimes derided, I think–there’s something a little sad, almost touching, about someone whose greatest ambition is merely for other people to allow him into their circle.

It’s easier for people to understand a conqueror type, like Djokovic. His is a more typically macho brand of ambition: crush the opposition, strut and swagger, enjoy being king of the hill, etc.

That’s not really the vibe Murray gives off, and that’s why people are slow to warm to him. The British media tries its best to create some kind of “champion” persona for him, but it’s totally incongruous. The more they make him out to be a traditional conquering hero type, the flatter their attempts fall.

But Murray’s desire for legitimacy also arouses sympathy in some people, particularly of course his fans. There’s something sweet, almost innocent, about someone who so sincerely wants to be accepted. And really, if that’s all he wants, it seems rather harmless to give it to him. This all ties into the boyish, arrested development aspects I was talking about earlier.


skeezer Says:

“steve-zero sounds like skeezer’s brother”

I do take offense to that, as steve-o and I have are own takes on things. We sometimes just happen to have the same conclusion, as well as a sea of other posters and fans.

However, Julia and nadalista are for sure 2 peas in a mattress.


skeezer Says:

“His never give up attitude.”

Really? And Fed doesn’t? Has he ever quit a match? Withdrawn? Retired? When Fed entered a tournament (over 1000 matches) he plays his best. He may not have his best that day, but he plays, and never quits, even if a “niggle” (like his back) is killing him.

“Had nothing against fed until I started coming on here and “met” some of his fans. It’s the fans that are the problem, not fed.”

Same here. Don’t like Rafa’s style on court, but don’t think he is a bad guy. The Rafafanatic club? Pfffft!


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Steve O i get your take on Rafa,one futhur question and ill leave it at that,am i to assume then that you condone Novaks gun incident,or the swearing at the crowd,or the team gyrating on the roof of a car bonnet,just wondering?


steve-o Says:

@hippy chic: but what does it matter if I do or don’t condone them? Either way, none of those things are as egregious as what Nadal does.

The gun thing? A tasteless joke, sure, but still just a dumb joke in a thoughtless moment, a couple people clowning around. Not the first time someone accidentally posted something on Facebook that should have stayed private.

Plenty of players swear in the middle of a match, in the heat of the moment. As for a bunch of people doing silly things on a car hood, who really cares? It’s their car, after all.

It’s totally different than Nadal, who systematically and continuously breaks the rules. He’s been fined for on-court coaching. He got physical with an opponent (this is a non-contact sport, not American football). He consistently goes over time on the serve (this is one thing Djokovic is also guilty of, true enough). He’s repeatedly insisted on changes to the rules that benefit him and him alone at the expense of the tour. He will go to any lengths to bend the rules, even to cheat, to win.

It seems you have nothing to say in defense of, or explanation of, Nadal’s actions, only to suggest that they are no different from anyone else’s and then try to change the subject of discussion to the supposed wrongs of others, in order to avoid talking about Nadal’s.

You have so much to say about those other people’s flaws, but nothing at all to say about Nadal’s.

Enough about my take on Nadal. I want to know YOUR take, which you have very carefully avoided giving in detail. How egregious do you think those actions are, do you think they are the actions of a sportsman, etc.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Steve O what exactly is it you want me to say?how many times do you want me to say,Nadal does say and do alot of things that get on my nerves,all of what you said is true,do you hear me denying it?no you dont?have i got anything to say to defend him no?cause everything your saying is true,the two year ranking,the shoulder checking Rosol,the time between points?im not one of those fans whose blind to their favorites flaws,and i dont condone them either,what more can i say?my apologies for ever bringing it up,i wont bother in future,i think probably the best thing for me to do would be to leave this forum and just leave everybody to it.


Thomas Says:

@steve-o
I agree with you with regards to nadal’s behaviour.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Thomas i agree too,even as a fan i didnt say i didnt.


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

TBH i get the impression sometimes i am out of my depth on this forum,my debating skills have never been all that great anyway.


Nadalista Says:

Make your mind up @skeezer, who do you wanna pair me with, @Julia or @Giles?


Nadalista Says:

……and since when is this talking tennis? Jeez…..


Nadalista Says:

Poor Fed, can’t be fun being constantly beat upon by the Nadal Mafia…….

#NoFair


Giles Says:

@Nadalista. I don’t think skeezer the geezer minds who he pairs you with as long as he is piggy in the middle. He’s a sick geezer that way! He likes threesomes! Lol


Giles Says:

Joker is a saint, Fed is a saint and Rafa is the devil incarnate.
Well, that is the impression these types like Steve zero want to convey! Fail miserably! Get a life you haters and stop posting garbage just for the sake of being heard!
Vamos King!


skeezer Says:

“stop posting garbage just for the sake of being heard!”

Lol! Like the last 5 posts?


TennisZod Says:

Federer has no flaws, thats why he is tennis god. Nole is the new perfect, ever gentleman and truly humble.
I admire steve-o for openly condeming Nadal’s several flaws. Lets be honest, Nadal is the lucifer of tennis. You can almost see his two horns and tail when he about to serve.
Good job, steve-o! Make Nadal pay for each of the 20 beatings he gave to your idol. Keep the Nadal hate campaign going. Lets convince more tennis fans about the dark side of Nadal.


Giles Says:

^^^ Geez. You sound like some sort of nutter. Why don’t you tear your shirt, hold a flag and run down a dark alley.


Legend Says:

Tennis x hippy chic,

We all can count on you to downplay Rafa, his achievements and records. Thank you. You are a true Rafa fan(not).

You sound better when you talk about Federer. Just sayin…


Tennis x hippy chic Says:

Legend if its all the same ill pass on this one,not in the mood right now sorry.


Julia Says:

skeezer Says:
“steve-zero sounds like skeezer’s brother”

I do take offense to that, as steve-o and I have are own takes on things. We sometimes just happen to have the same conclusion, as well as a sea of other posters and fans.

However, Julia and nadalista are for sure 2 peas in a mattress.

Nadalista and I usually are on the same page of thinking but lumping me with Giles…nahhh….I am not a fan of some of his insults towards other players , same reason i am not a fan of skeezer. As far as Rafa’s never give up attitude, skeeze sure got defensive. I never said fed didn’t have that. I just explained how I became a fan of Rafa and I saw what I saw, and Rafa’s never give up attitude was more pronounced at that final than fed’s. I shouldn’t have to apologize for that. Skeeze, you say Rafa isn’t a bad guy, yet you constantly, oooh wait, let me use the word consistently like steve-zero does, accuse him of faking injuries, not a good tennis player (tell that to those who can’t beat him), not a good sportsman,etc… When I said fed wasn’t the bad guy, it was his fans that cause problems (making excuses for him, age, back, etc….)that fed does NOT say. If his back is hurting him too bad, then he shouldn’t play, end of story. How many times have you said that about Rafa???? Same applies to your precious fed. Hope you love living vicariously through him.

Top story: Rafael Nadal Is Training Hard For 2015 [Video]
Most Recent story: Nadal Named Tommy Hilfiger Global Brand Ambassador - Rafa's Confident, Fun And Cool!
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Dec 15 WTA - Dec 15
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Roger Federer2 Maria Sharapova
3 Rafael Nadal3 Simona Halep
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Petra Kvitova
5 Kei Nishikori5 Ana Ivanovic
6 Andy Murray6 Agnieszka Radwanska
7 Tomas Berdych7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Milos Raonic8 Caroline Wozniacki
9 Marin Cilic9 Angelique Kerber
10 David Ferrer10 Dominika Cibulkova
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.