Nadal, Federer Match Land Tennis a Rare Sports Illustrated Cover Nod

i so agree. there are so many levels of irony that it’s impossible to count. his biggest loss to date and he makes the cover! never mind that he tied borg last year in a final that was equally epic.

maybe it’s just me but i see last year and this years final pretty even in terms of effort. sure there were no rain delays, finishes in semi-dark, longest recorded time or nail biter tie breaks. but both went to fifth sets, both had history on the line for the winner and one person made the errors in the fifth set. last year it was nadal, this year it was federer.

July 10th, 2008 at 3:37 pm

*****”maybe it’s just me but i see last year and this years final pretty even in terms of effort. sure there were no rain delays,…. ”

**”and one person made the errors in the fifth set. last year it was nadal, this year it was federer.”***

WOW, I wonder whether all of the sportswriters, pundits, newscasters, fans et al., are aware that they could have spared themselves the time and effort expended in predicting, theorizing, breaking down the match point by point, etc., by just summarizing the Federer v. Nadal final in terms of the errors made. Such an extremely simple analogy overlooked by the experts that would have made the blogging and commenting moot. I also wonder if Federer and Nadal realized they could have saved themselves the duress and energy? This is truly an eye-opening fact for me — I could have saved myself a lot of time by only watching the 5th set for the errors made. LOL!!!!

July 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pm

Sean if you’re worried there’s a bias against Federer at Sports Illustrated, you can look at a recent piece entitled “A Federer Fan suffers as his god meets his match” – I am not kidding: the writer refers to Roger as “his god” and his “belief system”! This is the SI website, however, not the magazine. But the article is unabashed hero-worshiping, to the point where the writer demeans Nadal by calling him a “bruiser” and the like, and considers Roger’s loss “the death of beauty”. I recommend that you read for it’s sheer hilarity! LOL

July 10th, 2008 at 5:57 pm

Von, are you german?

July 10th, 2008 at 7:24 pm

JCF:

No achtung or verboten in my lineage, but why do you want to know? I got it, VON. Right? That’s just a shortened form of my given name. I wish I had a Count Von der (?) something in my lineage that would mean I’m royalty, correct? However, I do have some Royalty in my lineage but it’s not German. Anyway, that’s for me to know and you’ll never find out. :) Keep guessing …

July 10th, 2008 at 7:31 pm

SI is not biased against just Federer. it’s tennis in general. Andy Roddick should have made the SI cover when he won the USO being a son of the soil, but he didn’t. That being the case, the Americans are not favored either. Hence, we can’t say it’s even a country bias. SI has its favored sports and sadly, tennis is not one of them. That’s just the way the cookie crumbles.

July 10th, 2008 at 7:36 pm

jane:

You piqued my curiosity — I read that article. The writer needs to find some more meaning to his life. Are people really that lost in their quest for fulfillment in their lives that they become worshipful toward another mortal? If this is true, we live in a very sad world.

July 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm

Hi Von,

I wondered whose curiosity that link might peak; it is a bizarre article hey? – in a kind of funny / sad way. It shows the over-the-top attachment people can have to things, or, as you put it, to other mortals, or in this case, sporting figures. That “blank and aching sadness” of which he speaks seems, um, a bit excessive. Surely it was a great final, but being that bereft over Fed’s loss is a little much.

July 10th, 2008 at 10:34 pm

Hi jane:

“Surely it was a great final, but being that bereft over Fed’s loss is a little much.”

That’s putting it mildly. The guy sure is bizarre, yes? Oh so sad — idol worshipping galore.

July 10th, 2008 at 11:20 pm

personally i think last years wimby final was a much better match quality wise.. and Fed’s loss to Safin in AO was higher quality as well.

July 11th, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Tejuz:

“personally i think last years wimby final was a much better match quality wise.. and Fed’s loss to Safin in AO was higher quality as well.”

I absolutely agree. That AO ’05 Safin v. Fed match was a great nail biter from the beginning to the end; same as last year’s Wimby. This year’s Wimby only the 4th and 5th set really was more action packed. The rain intensified the drama. God I’m probably going to get killed for this statement, but what the hell, this is the first time I’m posting on the match, even though I dislike post-mortems.

July 11th, 2008 at 4:01 pm

Von,

“God I’m probably going to get killed for this statement”

No way girl – to each her (his) own! I loved that AO semi; one of my all time fave matches – sparkling tennis till the last ball was struck.

I am happy, though, about the hype this year’s Wimbledon final is drawing, of only because it’s waking people up to the phenomenal sport we’re all addicted to here!

July 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pm

jane:

“No way girl – to each her (his) own!”

I tell you what — you can stand in front of me and take the bullets when they start coming. :) Is that a deal?

“I am happy, though, about the hype this year’s Wimbledon final is drawing, of only because it’s waking people up to the phenomenal sport we’re all addicted to here!”

Touche`. No arguments here – I’m all for it. Albeit, this year’s Wimby has caused a stir in the sports world, I can guarantee that tennis will still NOT take root or become a permanent change in the minds of the avid football, baseball, basketball and golf fans. The ATP and the USTA need to put in some PR work and money into promoting the sport. The ball’s in their court!

July 11th, 2008 at 4:54 pm

how ironic after all of Federer’s titles, wins, records, etc., he finally graces the cover after a loss!

My thought exactly…and his backside to boot!

July 11th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

sardino:

“My thought exactly…and his backside to boot!”

You’ve got a humorous side!! Great. I couldn’t refrain from commenting on the above sentence — it was so funny. I love to laugh and appreciate those with a sense of humor. Keep the humor alive. :)

July 11th, 2008 at 6:00 pm

a lot of people still find it hard to accept Rafa’s contribution to the sport and that is why I see them trying to dumpen his moment of glory by bringing up PAST matches that no one recognizes (i.e AO semi/final),let’s all be fair and avoid all these diversions. same sceptics who never thought he could not excel on any other surface-the guy has revitalised tennis and has earned his place through hard work and determination, at least-you can respect the effort.

July 11th, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Von,

“Is that a deal?”

Sure: sacrifice myself to the cause? No prob! You’re right that there’ll need to be more promotion by the ATP though.

casper,

Personally I am thrilled that Nadal won! So my reflecting on the AO semi has no impact on what I think of Rafa’s achievement – the first man to win RG & Wimbedon since Borg! Pretty phenomenal imho.

July 11th, 2008 at 7:25 pm

jane

“Personally I am thrilled that Nadal won! So my reflecting on the AO semi has no impact on what I think of Rafa’s achievement – the first man to win RG & Wimbedon since Borg! Pretty phenomenal imho.”

fair enough-i’m glad you also see it that way, i hope you don’t confuse my previous post for an attack of some sort-just an observation. up until the arrival of Rafa, everyone else was turning into a recreational player “with Roger winning all the major titles”-so hopefully my thoughts are justified

July 11th, 2008 at 9:10 pm

I’m glad this awesome tennis match got on the cover of SI. It’s great, especially considering the vast, vast majority of people in the USA don’t give a **** about tennis.

July 12th, 2008 at 12:53 am

I remember Steffi Graf also generated more buzz if she fails to win a match. Federer seems to be in the same league with her.

July 12th, 2008 at 2:32 am

To casper:

No one’s denying Nadal’s achievement… He IS the undisputed No. 1 in 2008 (even though Fed’s still the No. 1 on paper), and, unless something extraordinary happens, WILL also finish this year as No. 1, but his hard work and determination doesn’t automatically mean everyone will like his tennis… Personally, I find his matches vs Fed uninteresting – partly because of the bad matchup which Nadal represents for the Swiss (causing him to hit so many of those errors), and partly because I find Nadal’s game speculative… The guy simply doesn’t think of tennis as a game, but as a war of attrition…

But who knows, maybe it’s because of the lack of that contrast which past rivalries usually had (e.g. Sampras – the serve & volleyer VS Agassi – the baseliner, or ditto for McEnroe VS Borg)? Nadal and Fed usually play from the baseline, but (as you may know) playing Nadal from the baseline normally equals a suicide… A common sense would thus tell us that Fed should definitely play more S & V, but unfortunately for him, the conditions nowadays heavily favor exactly the opposite (i.e. the baseline game)…

July 12th, 2008 at 5:42 am

If Federer playing serve and volley against Nadal. It means suicide as well. He get passed very often at the French, when he was at the net. Like last year Wimbledon final, Federer get passed very often by Nadal. He won because of his serve, and Nadal was tired in the final.

July 12th, 2008 at 6:41 am

Von – no, being a Count wouldn’t make you royalty, would it? Just aristocracy.
Regarding press coverage of sport, I think the press is much the same in the UK – go for the dramatic headlines particularly if they’re negative. Perhaps understandably, boxing is extra vulnerable to such treatment. If some guy who’s guilty of a crime, had a couple of amateur fights twenty years ago, they’ll describe him as an “ex-boxer”. Similarly, the press jumped on the rumours of betting irregularities in tennis.

July 12th, 2008 at 7:57 am

hi everyone, …what a match!
if nothing, it put tennis on the SI cover, didn’t it?
I agree that it is pretty ironic to mention Fed on SI cover in his defeat. but were any of his wins as dramatic and epic as this loss?

after the match I just regretted that there should be a loser in tennis. Fed fought for about 5 hours , but Rafa was just a bit better. for me there are two winners. I have a new level of respect for Roger. I was in heavens to see Rafa lift the wimbledon trophy. but I was surprisingly sad to watch Fed as the runner up.

this was the greatest match I have watched and I love both guys for the champions spirit and the class that they displayed.
Vamos RAfa and Vamos Roger!

July 12th, 2008 at 8:07 am

The SI Cover has a prophecy in the image: Federer’s best days (i.e., winning 3 Grand Slams in a calendar year) are behind him, so the image of his backside tells the story within a picture. If anything’s eating at Federer today besides losing outright, it’s likely the 2nd Set. He held to go up 4-1, then watched Nadal reel off the next 5 games to take the set 6-4. It’s the 3rd time this year Nadal’s mounted a rally from a deficit like that to Federer: Monte Carlo, Hamburg and now Wimbledon. That Nadal can pull that off on clay against Federer isn’t surprising. But I can’t remember anyone ever taking 5 straight games from Federer on grass. Roger’s not disappearing, but he’ll have to work harder than he’s ever had to if he wants to surprass the Grand Slam record. Nadal and Djokovic have taken him out at all the Majors this year.

This match went on as long as it did because Nadal tightened up at two junctures where he could have ended it a lot sooner. The 3rd Set 7th game, Nadal had 0-40 on Federer’s serve, yet a bunch of errors cost him the chance he had cash in on one of those points. Then the 4th Set tie break at 5-2 serving with the match on his racquet yielded a choke Double Fault, then a meek (for him) backhand into the net. His nerves for being that close to his dream title got to him, but now that he won it he might not be so tight when he gets into that position again. It’s stunning to think that Nadal could have won this in 3 Sets if he’d have flipped one of the 3rd Set break points in game seven. What effect a straight set loss to Nadal in a Wimbledon Final would have had on Federer is scary to contemplate.

“War of attrition” to describe the Nadal game? OK. But at the top of professional tennis, it’s all a war of attrition, especially mentally. The aesthetics of elegant stroke production, smooth ball striking, etc. mean a lot more at the Club Player level, and maybe in the Juniors. Among Tennis Professionals at the top, pretty hitting is of such secondary importance as to be virtually irrelevant. At the top of the game are the great minds (knowing when & how to hit your shots), and great feet (getting yourself into position to execute). In the Top 5 you may or may not strike a beautiful looking shot, but you absolutely must be able to move and think. Moving & thinking are Nadal’s stock-in-trade, and as long as he can do both of those he’ll be in the Top 5 for a long while yet.

July 12th, 2008 at 10:21 am

to skorocel

“…but his hard work and determination doesn’t automatically mean everyone will like his tennis… Personally, I find his matches vs Fed uninteresting…”

that’s what separates him from the rest of the field, he is winning against the best player in the sport and has him rattled. what counts most is that he’s getting the results others have failed to achieve (despite being around longer than him), getting the job done always has to take priority for every professional and that is what Rafa is. well you can’t say he’s winning ugly-i’m sure there are aspects of his game that most would find quite appealing and his tremendous improvement over the last few years also deserves some applauding. i admire Roger a lot and that is why i feel it will be in his best interest to respond like a true professional otherwise the rout will persist and talk of Rafa’s forehand to his backhand will start to sound like a poem. tennis is a contest and one must always try to find ways of overcoming his adversaries (adjust and readjust), the problem with Roger is that he relies too much on his own opinion but at the end of the day he has to contest against the intelligence of Toni and that of Rafa himself.

July 12th, 2008 at 10:36 am

Well, regarding rankings I’m not so sure Nadal will be “guaranted n. 1” this year. It’s clearly his best shot and it will mostly depends on him, his run at US open, where he can gain 850 points.

But other then Cincy (where Nadal has 5 points to defend) his other MS results are good: Semi in Canada, Quarters in Madrid and Finalist in Paris, so I don’t see him getting extra points. Nadal is not schedule to play any small tournament, just the 4 MS, US open, Beijing and Masters Cup.

If Fed could survive the US hard courts (350 points in Canada – finalist, 500 in Cincy – winner and 1000 in US Open – winner) and maintain number one, he will kept it untill year end (MC), where Nadal would have an extra shot since he never made the final and Fed could loose more points there too.

Fed will play Basel (a secure win I think – deffending his points) and is schedule to play Stockholm (where he can win extra 225 points).

Fed needs to make final in all 3 US hard and Nadal will have to better his run in Cincy (probably) and US Open (his “weaker tournament”).

Very exciting weeks ahead of us where we can really measure the impact of that fantastic Wimbledon final in both players.

July 12th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

I don’t think this match is so great, as there is so many unforce error.

The greatest match I have ever seen is the Final of Grand Slam Cup between Becker and Sampras. Not much unforce error on both players.

July 12th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

“his own opinion but at the end of the day he has to contest against the intelligence of Toni and that of Rafa himself.”

That is a very good point. As great a tennis mind as Fed is, he might need some outside help to beat the tactical genius of Rafa and Uncle Toni. Uncle Toni’s support is very under-rated. One simple example is how even a mentally tough player like nadal has to keep looking at his box for uncle toni to get some much needed assurance. At this point it maybe just by habit, but there is no denying the role of uncle toni in shaping up nadal as a player.

Also, I wish federer got a solo cover of his own for all the insane numbers he put up, but given how tennis rating rank consistently below that of poker in the US of A, we have to take whatever morsels are thrown at us. What else can you expect from a sport that is one law-suit away from bankruptcy? In a tennis utopian world in a paralle universe, Fed would have had atleast 20 SI covers and Rafa atleast 5 and both of them together atleast 10. There would be an exclusively devoted channel to tennis where you can see EVERY tennis match live and highlights/replays of any old matches.

Ok! end of dream. time to wake up and break my fast!

July 12th, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Uncle Ton is the most underrated tennis coach. If anybody’s read any of his interviews you could see just what a clever and insightful man he really is. Nadal hit the jackpot being born into that wise and gifted family.

Hurrah for the SI cover! I thought I’d never see tennis on the cover of SI in my lifetime. Better now than never! It’s probably salt on the open wound for Federer fans however.

And now Rafael has an asteroid named after him! That’s better than getting a stamp, or a cow. :)

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/showsports.aspx?id=SPOEN20080056818

July 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

zola is back!! welcome back!!

July 12th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Roddick did not get a SI cover but Federer and Nadal did? Does it mean the US media has finally realized that Roddick is just a donkey that will be flogged by the top players?

July 12th, 2008 at 3:55 pm

Colin:

“Von – no, being a Count wouldn’t make you royalty, would it? Just aristocracy.”

Thanks for the class adjustment, but if you noticed I spelt “royalty” using a lower case “r” — meaning that a count would think of himself as some form of royalty in the old days of Russia, Germany, and I suppose Austria (?) as well. It’s sort of similar to an Esquire in England, who posessed huge estates of land and money. They also thought of themselves as royalty instead of aristocracy. However, in the US, an Esquire is an attorney, e.g., Von …., Esq., meaning attorney at law; different from your lawyers who are Barristers-at-Law.. It’s amazing how different countries use the same word and/or name to denote different forms of status. For me, status is a bunch of nonense, and we should be all be thought of as equal.

“Regarding press coverage of sport, I think the press is much the same in the UK – go for the dramatic headlines particularly if they’re negative.”

You’re so right about the foregoing. Sensationalism sells and the press is attuned to making the most out of what sells, e.g., eye-catching headlines. How many headlines did Mother Teresa generate as opposed to O.J. Simpson? Maybe ten as compared to his thousand.

July 12th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

Roddick is a donkey:

“Does it mean the US media has finally realized that Roddick is just a donkey that will be flogged by the top players?”

There’s only ONE donkey that I see braying on this thread, and I’m sure you know who that is? Be gentle with those vocal cords; too much braying and they’ll begin to screech.

July 12th, 2008 at 4:00 pm

Roddick is a donkey (aka Joker, jack, Fed-Rafa, roddick is a donkey, your many other aliases, and including the other (aside from Roddick is a donkey) that you’re presently using today–

Did you know that your writing is very transparent and it betrays you? I’m not going to state my chosen profession, but I’m drilled to look for similarities and out of the ordinary things, phrases, words, etc., which people say and do. That said, there are a few catch words and phrases you use which betrays who you are. In other words, a leopard can’t change his spots. And BTW, aren’t you a bit too old for this sort of nonsense? Were’nt you ever taught to play fair and nice? Since you have not progressed through the stages of life to adulthood, I would suggest you use this time to endeavour to do so, as time is reunning out — you’ll be 65 and still find yourself stuck in your terrible twos stage, throwing your ususal tantrums about Fed. Now, that woud indeed be a travesty — and, I mean it in the nicest way. :) run along now, you have a lot of work to do aside from beating up on Roddick, who you recently referred to as “a donkey on ice.” Does that ring a bell?

July 12th, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Hi Zola:

Welcome back!! You were missed. Your guy was great; winning FO and Wimby back to back. I’m happy for you and him. You must be on Mount Olympus. :) Enjoy!!

July 12th, 2008 at 4:22 pm

voicemale:

“This match went on as long as it did because Nadal tightened up at two junctures where he could have ended it a lot sooner. The 3rd Set 7th game, Nadal had 0-40 on Federer’s serve, yet a bunch of errors cost him the chance he had cash in on one of those points.”

The 7th game was the turning point that lead to Fed getting back into the match and taking it to 5 sets. Had Rafa broken Fed, there wouldn’t have been a tie-break, and the match would have eded in 3 straight sets. Fed will win more times than not in the tie-breaks against Rafa as his serve always bails him out, as opposed to the 5th set wherein he had to win the games to put him in front. In the games Rafa will win because he can outplay Fed on the crucial points, e.g., keeping more balls in play and prolonging the points, plus going to Fed’s backhand most of the time. In a tiebreak, it more or less all comes down to who is the more effective server.

July 12th, 2008 at 4:56 pm

Regardless of what has happened this year so far.. it is gonna seem very stupid to the public eye if Federer wins the USO but Nadal passes him in the rankings the week after because he gains some new points and Federer just protects the ones hes already got…. I wonder which news will be bigger, “Federer wins 5th straight USO” or “Federer is #1 no more”

July 12th, 2008 at 5:18 pm

“Roddick is a donkey on ice”

That is so apt. You can classify sharapova in the same category. Absolutely dumb games and moving like, well, donkeys on ice.

It will be great if Federer, Nadal or Djokovic win the olympics gold and come to the states and kick the donkey in the quarters. I hope donkey does not clean up the lame-as-hell indianapolis, LA and DC tournaments and get 4th seeding ahead of davydenko (there is a DONKEY in his name!). The coward and unpatriotic donkey deserves nothing but such humiliation!

July 12th, 2008 at 5:48 pm

We are the product of what we write and speak, and You have demonstrated once again that your screen names are INTERCHANGEABLE. Roddick might be a donkey in your opinion, however, he’s a very, very rich donkey. I’ll take the donkey with the money, and a rather handsome one at that, as opposed to the braying mule, whose incessant mule-headed stubborness and braying falls easily into the traps set for it. But, heck, what can one expect of a monomanical who epitomizes cockalorum?

July 12th, 2008 at 6:11 pm

i can’t wait till us open, then rafa will have three slams this year.

July 12th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

“The coward and unpatriotic donkey deserves nothing but such humiliation!”

I wish all the other players were as “UNPATRIOTIC” as Roddick, then we’ll see so many top players playing and winning Davis Cup, won’t we?

The above posts calling Roddick names are an example of how unfair posting is on these threads. God forbid anyone should state anything, that is perceived as negative toward Federer, then the walls of Jericho will come tumbling down, but when it involves another player, most of the opposition have carte blanche to speak at length however krass they appear and gets a free pass.

In response to the SI thread and its unfairness to tennis, I mentioned in passing that it’s not a country bias, but a tennis bias, and cited Roddick’s USO win as an example;it’s now turned into a mud slinging against Roddick.

Measure for Measure

“The miserable have no other medicine but only hope”. –

July 12th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

Just because you’re saying a tennis player is rich and ‘good-looking’ (even if the part about looks is true, which it’s not) doesn’t nullify someone else’s criticism. So he doesn’t like Roddick. Big deal. Saying how much you love Roddick’s money and fugly mug won’t change anything.

July 12th, 2008 at 7:28 pm

Fed isn’t afraid, Von,
thanks. It’s good to be back especially after some spectecular wins from Rafa. I am seriously in Mt Olympus right now!

I love the FO/ Wimbledon wins but also Hamburg and Queens are two phenomenal wins by Rafa. I am so glad RAfa added those wins to his resume.

Von dear, why do you respond to some comments that are clearly made to annoy people? Don’t even read them!

Fed isn’t afraid,
I am not sure about RAfa winning the US Open. For me the FO/Wimbledon is enough. I want RAfa to be 100% fit. His game has improved but he has been playing non-stop fpr 3-4 months. So for me, the priority is seeing him play without injury for the rest of the year. If not, he should take some time off to recharge the body.

July 12th, 2008 at 7:57 pm

Sean,
I am calling Mirka, IMG and all the betting companies to let them know you caused Fed’s loss by picking him to wim Wimbledon.:)

I am so glad you did not pick Rafa! Pls no US Open predictions for RAfa!

July 12th, 2008 at 8:00 pm

Hi Zola:

You’re correct about Rafa resting — he needs to rest those knees. whether he wins the USO or not, will not change what he has accomplished this year — his place in greatness is assured. I’m sure he’s now fishing, hanging out with his friends, and the USO is not in his thoughts.

July 12th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

Chris M:

you’ve missed my whole point, but c’est la vie. Are you the alter ego of the mule?

July 12th, 2008 at 8:13 pm

While I agree that men’s tennis is long overdue on the cover of SI, I’m utterly disappointed in the photo they chose to use. Not only is it a slap in the face to one of the most accomplished players in history to show him basically flailing at a shot, but it is one of the poorest cover photos ever for SI (name the last great sportsman who had been captured on the cover in such an unflattering manner).

How SI could choose to ignore Federer’s achievements against (frequently) far less compelling cover stories in the last 4 years is truly difficult to comprehend, given that all the most famous men’s players of the last 30 years showed up on the cover at least once (even Lendl, who wasn’t exactly loved by the American press or public!). But to then put him on the cover as a loser???? You can argue all you want about the lack of interest in men’s tennis (i.e., sales) being the driver for Federer’s absence from the cover, but to not recognize one of the greatest atheletes and sportsman of the last 30 years can only point to an anti-Federer bias among the senior editors at SI. Even Wertheim himself often seemed incredulous of his bosses’ cover story decisions.

Many have pointed out that SI is meaningless in the bigger picture, and I would agree, but for someone who would like to see tennis and Federer get more respect and visibility in the U.S., I feel compelled to express my complete disgust with a magazine that I used to subscribe to. SI is a third-rate publication and my back issues will now go to the recycling bin.

And for full disclosure’s sake, I am a big Federer fan and I was disappointed at his loss, but it was a great match and the Federer-Nadal rivalry is one to cherish. I also admire Nadal for his steely resolve, brutal efficiency, and impeccable class, but I have to admit that I would like to see Federer ultimately sit atop the pantheon of greats…with Nadal closely behind.

Does anybody know what Wertheim’s email address is? Can’t find it on SI.com.

July 12th, 2008 at 8:13 pm

Von, if you think I’ve missed your point (such as it was, I didn’t), you’ve missed mine. Your question proves that. Insert pithy French phrase here.

July 12th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

Sean, si is best known 4 its half naked girl cover. Rafa with his bulging bicep fits in well. It’not about tennis.

July 12th, 2008 at 11:03 pm

lendl’s si cover was “the champion no one cares about” so i don’t think that counts.

July 12th, 2008 at 11:10 pm

Zola – just wanted to say nice to see you back on the boards here – cool that Rafa won Wimbledon. The improvements to his serve and slice really paid off in that match.

July 13th, 2008 at 1:22 am

Glad to see SI put the Wimby final on the cover. Great (grueling) match by two masters. It was a long battle which came down to which player could win a point in near darkness…hardly a slam dunk. Both should be proud of how they played. Nadal has improved, but don’t count Fed out as his poor health took it’s toll this year. There are many wins left ahead for Fed.

July 13th, 2008 at 1:26 am

Whats up wih this?
“Who’s Got the Funk…
1.Rafael Nadal
1st man to win French + Wimbledon in same year,”

What about Bjon Borg?…

July 13th, 2008 at 9:07 am

“Von Says:
voicemale:

“This match went on as long as it did because Nadal tightened up at two junctures where he could have ended it a lot sooner. The 3rd Set 7th game, Nadal had 0-40 on Federer’s serve, yet a couple of errors cost him the chance he had to cash in on one of those points.”

The 7th game was the turning point that lead to Fed getting back into the match and taking it to 5 sets. Had Rafa broken Fed, there wouldn’t have been a tie-break, and the match would have eded in 3 straight sets.”

So..I’m curious, Von:

You felt the need to reiterate what I said? Doesn’t it seem rather obvious to re-state that the match would have been unlikely to see 5 Sets had Nadal broken at 3-all 0-40 in the 3rd Set, which I thought I’d said already? And did you not see the 4th Set tie break when Nadal had 5-2 with two serves coming to close the deal then, which incidentally also would have derailed a 5th Set had he succeeded with both serves? Are you saying Federer got won that 4th Set Tie Break when down 2-5 because of his “more effective” serving – when it was in fact a choke Double Fault by Nadal followed by a back hand into the net that brought that tie break back on serve?

I think it’s clear that Federer got back into this match because Nadal got tight at the moments it mattered to shut the door. When Federer failed to cash in on the lone break chance he had in the 5th Set it was painful to watch, but the pressure was getting to him. It was after that failed chance that we started seeing a lot more break points on his serve, saving 5 before Nadal flipped the last one in game 15. So whatever point you were trying to make is lost on me.

July 13th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Jane,
thanks a lot. How have you been? I am still trying to get over that final!
I am so proud of Rafa. Not only the way he played, but the way he handled himself after both FO and Wimbledon victories. with utmost respect to Federer.

I am not a Fed fan at all, but seeing his interview with JMac was heartbreaking. I seriously wished there could have been a draw!

Ali,
I agree that no one should count Fed out, but poor health is no excuse. He played magnificently for 5 sets, coming up with impossible shots all the time. But Fed lost because Rafa outplayed him. as simple as that.

but I expect Fed to come back firing during the hard court season defending his No 1 and US Open title.

jgc,
is this the picture of the last point played in the final? then it might be significant. but you are right, it would have ben good to show Fed’s face as well. Maybe the photo before the match, the trophy pic or something like that. Anyway, if you press the link to the article, you’ll see an “e-mail” button. I think you can write your comments there. :)

July 13th, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Voicemale1:

Perhaps you won’t believe this, but it was not until AFTER I addressed that post to you that I realized I’d made a mistake. You’re NOT someone I want to engage in a discussion as you relish in demeaning others. I won’t even bother to explain my point to you — as you so aptly put it — “it’s lost to me.” Enjoy your tirades and the satisfaction you derive in diminishing others while attempting to impress the masses with your imagined superlative tennis knowledge. Thank you for the reminder of why I don’t discuss anything with you. My post to you was a perfect occasion to use an editing option which is sadly not available on this site — it would have come in rather handily. End of discussion ……

July 13th, 2008 at 2:55 pm

zola,
I’m good, thanks. Del Potro won his first ATP title today! I bet he’s glad Rafa decided to rest. But he beat Gasquet in the final, in straight sets, which is something for the young gun. I hope he uses the momentum into the summer hardcourts. I like Cillic, Del Potro and Gulbis, the latter being my favorite young up-and-comer.

July 13th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

Jane,
I like those three as well, especially Gulbis. He was the only one to take a set off Rafa in wimbly. I really like to see one of his matches , hopefully not against Rafa.

I don’t know what is foing on with Gasquet. Such a beautiful game and such a fragile mind. I did not see the match and can’t say what happened, but I expected him to win.

I watched the Wimbledon final again today. I can never really see the match while it is on. I am so nervous I miss all the importsnt points. RAfa was always ahead. He missed so may chances to close out that match. I think he will be fine during the hard court season. Of course I don’t expect anything more from him. If he has health issuus, he should take some time off to recover, but if he is 100%, I am sure he will have a good run.

when is Toronto? in a week? OMG!

July 13th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

Daniel:

“Well, regarding rankings I’m not so sure Nadal will be “guaranted n. 1″ this year. It’s clearly his best shot and it will mostly depends on him, his run at US open, where he can gain 850 points.

But other then Cincy (where Nadal has 5 points to defend) his other MS results are good: Semi in Canada, Quarters in Madrid and Finalist in Paris, so I don’t see him getting extra points. Nadal is not schedule to play any small tournament, just the 4 MS, US open, Beijing and Masters Cup.”

Yes he did have solid results. His performances on hardcourt are always underrated by people purely because compared to his lofty clay standards, his HC results look like a Challenger player’s results.

But where Nadal is to narrow the gap isn’t just what he can gain in the second half of the season, but also combined with what Fed stands to LOSE. He has a lot of points to defend, and I’m not sure he will be able to do it. His confidence must have taken a beating by now, as he’s used to having two slams this time of the year with a handful of masters series titles and some small tournaments as icing on the cake. Stark contrast compared to last year.

July 13th, 2008 at 11:27 pm

“Von Says:
Voicemale1:

Thank you for the reminder of why I don’t discuss anything with you. My post to you was a perfect occasion to use an editing option which is sadly not available on this site — it would have come in rather handily. End of discussion ……”

1) If you “don’t dicuss anything” with me, then why did you respond to my post in the first place?

2) The correct word in the context you use it is “handy”, not “handily”.

3) “End of discussion”?? We can only hope you mean it, since you spend more time ankle-biting the posts of others rather than posting anything insightful on your own.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:49 am

I think the major different between Nadal and Federer is determination. I’m not saying that Federer has no determination at all. In fact, he is one of the mentally toughest tennis players in the world. It just the matter of who is mentally tougher, Nadal or Federer, which in my opinion is slightly headed by Nadal. For example, when his position was threatened by Djokovic’s performance in the first half of the year, Nadal works harder (and smarter). He doesn’t feels intimidated, and it is shown through the records in recent matches between him and Djokovic in Hamburg, French open as well as Queen. As a result, he has successfully turned Djokovic’s pressure into his own success.

Federer on the other hand cannot cope with the pressures created by Nadal. He lost to Nadal for the first time this year in Monte Carlo and started from there, he began to lose his confidence every time he faces Nadal. Consequently, he lost very badly in French open as well as Wimbledon which is his favorite tournament. The question is, if Federer can easily beat some of the best players out there in straight set, why can’t he beat Nadal (easily or hardly)? In my opinion, it obviously happens because of Nadal factor that exists in Federer’s mind all this year.

Personally, there is no doubt that Nadal has played tremendously great on clay and grass court season this year but the reason of why Federer lost to him in Wimbledon is not just because of Nadal’s ability, but it also caused by the lack of mental strengthens by Federer (towards Nadal).

July 14th, 2008 at 2:48 am

correction: not mental strengthens but “mental strength”.

July 14th, 2008 at 2:58 am

Voicemale 1:

1) If you “don’t dicuss anything” with me, then why did you respond to my post in the first place?

You’re so very correct. I should never have mentioned anything to you. Sometimes we do things by rote without thinking. My bad. Anyway, for your information, I was agreeing with your post, hence the reiteration, but that’s not a good thing, which you so abrasively pointed out to me.

2) The correct word in the context you use it is “handy”, not “handily”.

I believe I used the correct word meaning: easily: e.g., We won handily. Mine: It would have come in handily. But, you’re the grammarian, so I’ll defer to you. I’m not into correcting other people’s use of language. I leave that for nit-pickers.

BTW, if you’re going to be a nit-picker, you should ensure that you’re perfect. You wrote: “Are you saying Federer got won that 4th Set Tie Break when down 2-5 because of his “more effective” serving”. Got “WON” — That’s how easy it is for someone to make a mistake, and why use Caps for “4th Set Tie Break”. Where’s the proper noun?

3) “End of discussion”?? We can only hope you mean it, since you spend more time ankle-biting the posts of others rather than posting anything insightful on your own.

If we could only see ourselves as others see us. Pot calling the kettle black, Voicemale? As for ankle-biting others, I believe that’s why most of us are hushed up by you. Be assured, you have my word on this, I will NOT post anything to you again. I’m so very, very sorry. sleep well, or is it sleep ‘good’?

July 14th, 2008 at 3:15 am

I dont think it has anything to do with confidence…. the point is that Nadal has always been superior to Federer in clay, and if last years Wimbledon final is indication, they have been very close on grass… this year Nadal just got a little better and was able to beat him…. last year Federer Nadal beat quite easily at the Masters Cup in Shanghai…. we´ll see then if something really has dramatically changed…

July 14th, 2008 at 7:47 am

Ezzora,
I agree that mentality is a factor when Fed plays Rafa. But as you said, not everything. Rafa had a lead over Fed and a FO win, last year and the year before, yet he lost both finals.

For the past three years Rafa and Fed have met in both FO and Wimbledon finals. RAfa lost ridiculusly in his first Wimbledon final . He played a very close on in the second and won the third. The trend is absolutely reverse for Roger.

This year he had tremendous improvements to his game. His serve saved him many times. his positioning, slice….To me what made Rafa so successful was his willingness to learn and work hard to improve.

The mental factor comes from the fact that Roger knows Rafa will come to the court very well-prepared. He doesn’t leave anything to the chance.

One factor is that Roger used to play without pressue. Now there is an all improved Nadal and of course Djokovic and that makes things harder. Watching their pre-match interview, I could sense Roger was very nervous.

Anyway, what Roger wanted to do was a much harder task than Rafa’s. Rafa repeated a record of 30 years, Roger wanted to repeat a record of more than 100 years. I think both him and Rafa are great athletes. I cannot believe I became a tennis fan just at the right time to be able to watch these two history greats.

July 14th, 2008 at 7:48 am

What a joke – after all Federer’s achievements in the past 4/5 years,he has to share the cover of SI with Rafael Nadal – no wonder not many people care about SI and what they think/do.

July 14th, 2008 at 7:57 am

Two of the greatest matches of all time – borg defeated mcenroe 8-6 in the 5th, nadal defeated federer 9-7 in the 5th. The common thing there is that mcenroe and federer are two of the most gifted players tennis has been blessed with. Borg and nadal are two of the most tenacious players to have players to have played the game.

Ofcourse mac and fed are quite strong mentally (you donot get to win 8 or 12 slams being a wuss) but they require the perfect day, so to speak, to get them through – more so than borg and nadal. Likewise borg and nadal are greatly talented as well, but if you had to characterize them with only one term, you would use something like mental strength more than talent. The point here being if the match goes 5 sets, it invariably means that each player was relatively unable to bring that “shut-down” kind of game, where the match would be finished at best in a tight 4th set.

In such a scenario, the guy who relies on talent is in a more out-of-comfort zone than the guy whose game’s corner-stone is mental strength. In the last 4yrs fed has not had to “scrape” through as many matches as did nadal. Even with federer having a miserable year thus far, he more often than not operates in a 1 or 0 mode. Ofcourse he fought off a game-tipsarevic in the aus open and turned his season around after being 1-5 down to hidalgo in the last set of the 2nd round at Monte-carlo.

This is new territory for federer. His game has been ridiculously lofty for the last 4yrs. This year, through a combination of his own game dropping a notch or two and nadal and djokovic stepping up into their prime years, he is having to search for the fighter in him. As a fed fan, I am totally proud of the way he is fighting. To come back from 2 sets down against nadal in this kind of form is a tremendous achievement.

I am not aware of the borg and mac match, but fed-nadal came down to literally the last couple of points. at deuce, fed was two-points from remaining the 5-time champ and nadal was 2 points from becoming the new-champ. It is painfully hard to take such a loss – but team Federer will only be better if they can put this behind them. There is still a lot of tennis to be played this year. It all depends on how hungry fed can keep himself. As long as he is hungry he will be in the mix on any surface.

July 14th, 2008 at 9:50 am

Rafa is simply a horrible match-up for Fed and “the worst opponent” as Fed told Sue Barker after the wimby final.There are other players who know how to beat fed and are capable of beating him but Rafa is the best when it comes to executing that game plan right through the duration of a match.It is not easy to sustain that sort of efficient execution for a prolonged period against Fed if he is playing well.Part of it is obviously explained by Rafa’s unmatched physical ability as reflected in his movement and court positioning apart from stamina/endurance.If nothing else works,he will simply wear you down-and out- esp in a best of five match.Rafa has consistently exposed and exploited Fed’s relative weak spots more than any other player.Fed is at his best when he is having a lot of rhythm and playing in his comfort zone.Players like Rafa and Murray-and to a lesser extent Nole-throw him off his rhythm and take him out of that zone.Despite what he says,I don’t think Fed really looks forward to playing Rafa and continuing losses in most of the finals of the bigger events would slowly but surely have started to damage Fed’s confidence when it comes to facing Rafa.I get the feeling that it is becoming increasingly mental now.The f.o. rout was bad enough but Fed himself says the wimby loss is a “disaster” for him.

I wonder if Fed will ever recover from this double whammy as far as the rivalry with Rafa is concerned.His h-to-h with Rafa promises to remain as lop sided as it has ever been even if Rafa were to meet Fed more often on the faster surfaces.Fed didn’t meet Rafa often enough on his favorite surfaces when he was in his prime.Now that Rafa appears to be entering his prime,I won’t be surprised-barring injury/fatigue-if he becomes almost as big a threat as Nole is on the faster surfaces as well.The recent improvements he has made-as seen in his awesome display against Murray-augur well for his chances on the hard courts.That sort of slightly risky but incredibly aggressive game is ideally suited for the quicker surfaces.I just couldn’t believe that Rafa was playing so aggressively and so close to the baseline.He reverted back to his time-tested methods in the final and rightly so because Fed hates them the most.However,I am sure Rafa will be more aggressive in the rest of the season and we will see him in his second ‘avatar’ more often.

As for Fed,the top rank situation is not in his control any more and I won’t be surprised if he continues in more or less the same fashion for the rest of the year.I guess he is in a bit of a crisis and he has to go back to the drawing board to work out what is needed to quell the Rafa-Nole challenge.His movement and court positioning have been just a wee bit off this year and his return game has stagnated but imho his bh is a big concern esp against Rafa.I know it is lunatic even to think but I get the feeling that he has no other option but to develop a double-handed bh.It may not be feasible to effect such a radical and fundamental transformation at such a late stage of his career but if anyone can pull it off,it is the swiss genius.

A coach like Gilbert would have helped him prepare better tactics/strategies.However, I am not sure Fed is the kind of person who will enjoy the company of a constant yapper like him for very long.Cahill apparently is not interested.I really can’t think of many names that will hit it off with Fed and his ‘coaching’ situation is much more complicated-both for Fed and any prospective coach-than it appears.Even then,I strongly think that he needs an almost full-time coach if only to bounce off ideas and give him a neutral opinion.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Fedex,
” fed-nadal came down to literally the last couple of points”
I’d go a step further and strongly believe that it became a contest of whose eyesight was just a wee bit better since both players said that they just couldn’t see towards the closing stages of the match.It became a bit of a lottery if it was a contest more of guesswork than anything else.It was very unfair to both players and play could easily have been suspended at 6-6 or 7-7 for instance.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:28 pm

Noel,
Fed has a great eyesight. Darkness is no excuse. The conditions were equal for both.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

oops, just adding to my previous comment. Fed converted only 1 of 13 break points. They could have suspended the match and all, but Rafa had that experience from last year ans he would have not lost this match. Rafa was ahead all the time and Fed had to play catch up until the fifth set.

I can say that if not for the first rain delay, this match might have ended in straight sets! who knows? so, darkness, with all the difficulty it caused, was not the reason Federer lost. It was Rafa.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

yeah, roger lost cause of poor light. lol whatever, zola is right, if not for rain delay roger would have lost in 3 sets. get over it, rafa is just a better tennis player than roger, there is no shame in that for roger, it’s just the reality.

July 14th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

zola,
I am not trying to take anything from Rafa’s great win.Here is my post dated 8th july from the thread “Nadal Finally Stops Federer in Epic 5-set Wimbledon Final”

Noel Says:

I know I may get flogged for this but both players said that they could not see towards the closing stages of the match.In that situation the match became a bit of a lottery or a contest of eyesights.Probably Rafa’s eyes were just a wee bit better or one could argue that he adapted better because his game has more margin for error.However,it was such a tight match in the end that you might as well do a toss of coin to decide a winner instead of forcing them to continue in the darkness.Considering the stage of the match, each and every point was decisive and it was very unfair to both players.I am not for a moment saying that Fed lost it because of bad light but it would have been much fairer to both had the match continued in better light the next day.I’d have said the same thing if Fed had won.It was worse than the Murray-Gasquet match.I can perfectly accept rain delays and windy conditions and how they affected both players-albeit a bit differently- but playing in the dark amounts to guesswork imho especially while returning and “engaging” in rallies.Rafa definitely adapted better to the windy conditions because his game allows him to do so whereas Fed needs more rhythm and has lesser margin for error.the first rain break definitely helped Fed-even though he was ahead in the third set- and the second one helped Rafa.
Taking the match into the next day would obviously have been very tough on the organizers and the spectators but i hate the thought of the fate of such a great match ultimately being decided by guesswork from the players.Rafa could easily have taken the match even in the brightest light but Fed would have had an equally great shot at it.It is a pity that there had to be a loser because there was hardly a difference between the two in the end.I guess this wimb was meant for Rafa and he was destined to win.I had been getting that feeling for quite a while.In fact I apprehended a much easier Rafa win given the level he reached in the queen’s final and the murray match and certainly thought this wimb was his to lose.His single-minded determination and focus on each and every point are quite scary.However,I didn’t expect Fed to lose once he won that amazing fourth set breaker and I am sure he’d have used the momentum against any other player to win the final set.I guess the second delay halted the momentum but the way Rafa responded despite serving second was hugely impressive.His tactics and overall strategy also were very good.He rightly stuck to his time-tested method of beating Fed with a safe top-spin game instead of the riskier and flatter game he displayed in the murray match.That approach would have suited Fed more. Fed appeared very confused esp when approaching the net.I just can’t comprehend why he doesn’t use his vicious back hand slice more often instead of playing top spin and making numerous unforced errors in the process.Clearly he has to go back to the drawing board and work on his game/tactics to quell the challenge of his leading rivals esp nadal.

Whatever arguments we may make,the fact remains that Rafa has achieved what is probably the toughest task in men’s tennis outside of winning the calender grand slam although Fed’s achievements at the slams in 2006 and 2007 are incredibly astonishing as well.Rafa is in the company of Laver and Borg now.Winning f.o. and wimb the same year is such a rare thing that anyone who does it has got be the player of the year irrespective of what others do at other major events.I am sure he will do much better on the hard courts this year because he has shown in the murray match that he can hit much flatter without sacrificing too much accuracy.The only question mark relates to his troublesome knees and it could threaten his chances of really coming into his own as he enters his prime.

And here is another post from the same thread in response to some very reasonable comments from JCF.

Noel Says:

JCF,
I agree it would have been tough on everyone concerned and i wrote that in my post but it is not as if finals have not been taken to a the third monday before at wimb.They had many opportunities to suspend play earlier at 6-6 or 7-7 for instance.The light was getting worse by the minute and there was no way one could tell that someone was going to win the match soon.Who knows how long the match would have gone in more normal conditions.Fed’s serve was broken in very bad light and he could not get the break back in even worse light.I do not infer that Rafa won’t have broken or Fed’d have broken back in better light but it always makes you wonder if the proceedings on court would have been identical in better light.It disturbs me and makes me sad that poor light could have possibly been even the slightest of factors affecting the proceedings in such an incredible match.Rafa would have been equally justified in feeling a bit miffed if he had lost under these circumstances. The way these guys were playing,they deserved much better but in their eagerness to finish things off,the organizers continued way beyond than what they should have.It was extremely unfair to both of them.wimb authorities want play to continue in darkness but do not install any floodlights.They should at least start providing night vision equipment to the players:)

Posted July 9th, 2008 at 8:03 am

July 14th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Noel,
I guess I didn’t read your previous comments . My post was in response to this comment:

**I’d go a step further and strongly believe that it became a contest of whose eyesight was just a wee bit better since both players said that they just couldn’t see towards the closing stages of the match***

but all is good. :)

July 14th, 2008 at 1:22 pm

just one more thing,
I wonder why knowing the weather forecast,the rain chances and all, the match was not scheduled a couple of hours earlier to avoid the risk of overflowing the final to Monday.
Those Wimbledon traditions can be really annoying sometimes.

night vision equipment all the way!

July 14th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

“rafa is just a better tennis player than roger, there is no shame in that for roger, it’s just the reality.”

Well you can say Rafa has the perfect game to baet Fed and he had proved so, he is the only one with the mental strengh to execute his game plan, but to say he is a better tennis player than Fed it’s way too much…

July 14th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Zola,
I do hope you read my post above.If I sound like making excuses,it was never my intention to do so and I apologize to anyone who has been offended.I don’t want to argue any further if people think that playing without seeing is part of the game.My simple point is this:How on earth can you play if you just can not see and it was just not Fed who said he could not see.Rafa said the same thing.How will the linesmen and the umpire make the right calls which is tough at the best of times because of the speed at which the game is played these days.Any mistake here or there could prove decisive and since the players themselves can not see,they won’t be in a position to know if any possible bad call is worth sending to the hawk eye or not……….As I said,it was extremely unfair to both players and such a great match did not deserve that sort of highly unsatisfactory situation in the end.It could -and imho should- have been avoided.

July 14th, 2008 at 1:50 pm

Noel,

no need to apologize, come on! You are too nice.

I got your point and I think everyone said that it was extremely unfair to both. I guess if Rafa lost that game, it would have definitely been suspended. Again , poor planning on Wimbledon’s part. Knowing the forecast they could have scheduled the match a bit earlier.

I read (or heard) that it was very hard to ask the players, the spectators and everyone involved to come back the next day. That’s why they waiter as long as they did. But that was the limit. It is ridiculus that Wimbledon or French Open don’t have lights.

July 14th, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Zola,
I am sorry I didn’t read your post while writing my latest post which I guess becomes a bit irrelevant now so far as getting my point across is concerned.All is indeed well:)
I agree the wimb authorities’ insistence on the so called “traditions” can tick one off.When they can advance the “tradition” of a two p.m. center court start to one p.m. these days,they might easily advance it to a 12 noon start under certain circumstances.Why tinker with “tradition” by bringing in the roof next year??!!The fact is that everything changes with time and wimb itself has changed a lot with time and there has been play on the middle sunday also which they did not allow last year for reasons best known to them.Sometimes it just becomes a bit too much.I can understand some of the scheduling but if they expect the matches to go deep into the ‘evening’ , they should have flood lights or at least the night vision equipment:)

July 14th, 2008 at 2:09 pm

Noel:

Sorry to do this, but I notice you’ve been attempting to type a “smiley”, however you’ve missed one step, as follows. After the period, you need to space one time, then type the :) and space again. It’s period, space, colon and paren together, then space again. The smiley will then come to fruition. I hope it works for you. :)

July 14th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Von,
As you said on the other thread,no need to apologize. :) In fact I am grateful to you for being such an astute observer and telling me the trick.Actually my smileys have turned exactly as I wanted/expected since I wasn’t even aware of this ‘trick’ although I have wondered often how other posters have put in that happy yellow face despite their being no obvious interface on this site to do it.Thanks again! :)

July 14th, 2008 at 7:25 pm

Noel:

You’re very welcome. Actually, I’m just a novice with the computer tricks, etc., but a very nice, poster, Kash, patiently took me though the steps of creating several other smileys. They can come out several different ways by just using the colon and the paren as follows: Colon+rt. paren; colon+CapitalD; colon+cap.P. This is how they will appear: :) ; :D ; . :P . Now I hope they indeed appear as smileys.

July 14th, 2008 at 7:40 pm

Von,
Thanks for sharing and passing on the knowledge to a computer novice like me.You might be a novice w.r.t the computer ‘tricks’ but I am a novice w.r.t. the computer itself.Hence a :( for a change

July 14th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

Federer era is over.Nadal is the undisputed number one and Djokovic is the number two player.These two will dominate tennis for the next few years.It is not inappropriate that the si cover shows Nadal’s face and not Federer’s.The sun has set for Federer and Nadal’s sun is rising all the time.Vamos Rafa!

July 15th, 2008 at 1:11 pm

I know why I pick my butt, no? Federer is dead has his head inside it all the time. I am trying to pull it out from there, no?

Federer is dead, please take your head out of my ass, no? I won wimbledon now and dont want to put fingers in my ass, no?

July 15th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

The cocky djokovic’s cockier mother pronounced at the australian open 2008 that”the king is dead, long live the king” and I loved her arrogance.In fact,the entire Djokovic clan seems to have been born with an uncouth, in-your-face arrogance.The way all of them treat Federer as a piece of s**t suggests that they are trying some mental disintegration tactics and how it has worked!The only mistake she made was that she appointed her son the new king rather early.I can not fault her the way her son thrashed the late king in the semi final.Little did she know about the clay and grass season and the future coronation of Nadal.

July 15th, 2008 at 5:49 pm

[…] to pose for pictures and sign every last item that we had. Nadal mentioned it was the first time he had signed the famous Wimbledon Sports Illustrated magazine cover. You can view some of the items we got signed by visiting our eBay […]

July 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am