ZIDANE
Full Member
I was going to say he's taking a long time with his serves...
Sampras has that plan B, he could do it against anyone because he had the best serve in the world and was one of the best volleyers...Fed's not gonna beat Nadal from the baseline. Sampras would gave stuck to serve and Volley against him.
Nice and mature there. You claimed Federer was still the best in the world and that his performances earlier in the season counted for nothing. I claimed the opposite; that Federer's performances this season showed that Nadal had overtaken him as the best player. You said I knew nothing.You childish fool. I defended Federer as a player not this game. Go away.
Says it all. Being outplayed on the big points. Something he has over any other player other than Nadal... who does it better now.Has there been a Nadal serve game that hasn`t gone to deuce?
Federer has the chance all the time here, but he doesn`t take it.
How many break points has Nadal saved in this set alone? I know he succumbed to one, but over the course of the whole match (remember those three Federer got in the first set?) he must have saved eight or nine.Has there been a Nadal serve game that hasn`t gone to deuce?
Federer has the chance all the time here, but he doesn`t take it.
Says it all. Being outplayed on the big points. Something he has over any other player other than Nadal... who does it better now.
It`s actually a reverse Wimbledon 2007 Final. Last year Federer was able to come out on top on the important points, this year Nadal just has the edge. Great mentality for an athlete so young.How many break points has Nadal saved in this set alone? I know he succumbed to one, but over the course of the whole match (remember those three Federer got in the first set?) he must have saved eight or nine.
...............Nice and mature there. You claimed Federer was still the best in the world and that his performances earlier in the season counted for nothing. I claimed the opposite; that Federer's performances this season showed that Nadal had overtaken him as the best player. You said I knew nothing.
All I'm saying now is that it looks like I'm being proved right; Nadal IS the better player.
That does not equate to a downward slide in the slightest and the illness and injury concerns were quite valid especially at the Australian when his build up was disturbed. Losing in the semi final of a grand slam and a French final to his main rival for the third time in a row no matter how the defeat came about is simply not a basis for that. Nadal was simply better as he has been for three years. There are two finals left to be won this year.
So if Nadal was to finally beat a player who has dominated him on grass just like he has dominated him on Clay. Or he beats a player that has won numerous titles on three surfaces while continously reaching the Final of the only one to elude him while Nadal has won on one surface, it will be the final nail in his coffin? Aged 26?
I did not say that at all. Just enjoy the tennis and stop trying to prove a point. It has been a great game so far.Even If Nadal won at Wimbledon, Federer would still clearly be number one in the rankings.
He's overtaken your favorite, it's reality. He's a fecking machine and is the true number one... and no, it's not the glandular fever anymore... it's humiliating.I think that'll be all she wrote, unfortunately. No one will win three sets in a row against Nadal when he's playing like this.
It really hasn't. Rafa "rat-face" Nadal is dismantling him, and I hate Nadal. He's boring, he grunts and he seems to be everyone's favourite for no other reason than he has big arms. His game is based purely around his strength and less on his skill, and it's a sad indication of the way the game is going.I did not say that at all. Just enjoy the tennis and stop trying to prove a point. It has been a great game so far.
To be fair, everyone can hit a ball hard in tennis nowadays, nobody can do it as consistently and and as sharp as he does. It's talent and skill.- the winners will be decided not on skill basis, but who's stronger or more powerful. Boooooring.
Krajicek is a serve and volleyer with the power and volleys to completely outplay an opponent... one-off, as sampras' dealt with him before and after... and he's actually got the game for grasscourt. Nadal's dominaing Federer now, in head to heads and has done well against him on hardcourts (won two of them... whilst federer won 2 or 3...) he's outhitting and outplaying him...Wimbledon Quarter Finals 1996
Richard Krajicek def Pete Sampras 7-5, 7-6, 6-4.
What a shit player Sampras was, a joke, never among the best.
Don't listen to some anti-Fed twats here. They are as bad people with Federer's cock in their mouth.Wimbledon Quarter Finals 1996
Richard Krajicek def Pete Sampras 7-5, 7-6, 6-4.
What a shit player Sampras was, a joke, never among the best.
I disagree there was some great tennis especially in the first set, it also got going straight from the off. Nadal is a bit boring but thats just his game, we have to live with it he is still a great player. He has simply won the important points, played well and Federer has not taken his chances which is unusual, dismantling is a bit strong. I think there is a bit more to come anyway.It really hasn't. Rafa "rat-face" Nadal is dismantling him, and I hate Nadal. He's boring, he grunts and he seems to be everyone's favourite for no other reason than he has big arms. His game is based purely around his strength and less on his skill, and it's a sad indication of the way the game is going.
If he starts to dominate (as it looks he might) then tennis is just going to go the way of so many other sports -- the winners will be decided not on skill basis, but who's stronger or more powerful. Boooooring.
Yes it would... they were talking about the grass being slower even back in those days. It would have played like a clay court if that's gotten worse since.I`m not going to pretend I know much about tennis, but isn`t there a reason for serve and volleyers don`t get far anymore at Wimbledon? Not sure why but maybe because the grass is so mucher slower than it was ten years ago, the ball bounces higher. It`s not really that fast a surface anymore. And when the court is like it is in the final week it gets even slower, and that favours baseline players like Nadal even more. Would Pete`s serve and volley game be as effective today like it was back then?
No one's claiming that Federer was never among the bestWimbledon Quarter Finals 1996
Richard Krajicek def Pete Sampras 7-5, 7-6, 6-4.
What a shit player Sampras was, a joke, never among the best.
You have to be excellent at the net to pull off a serve and volley game otherwise baseliners like Nadal and Agassi will always find shot to pass you. Likes of Sampras, Becker rarely got passed at the net even against some of the best baseliners around.I`m not going to pretend I know much about tennis, but isn`t there a reason for serve and volleyers don`t get far anymore at Wimbledon? Not sure why but maybe because the grass is so mucher slower than it was ten years ago, the ball bounces higher. It`s not really that fast a surface anymore. And when the court is like it is in the final week it gets even slower, and that favours baseline players like Nadal even more. Would Pete`s serve and volley game be as effective today like it was back then?
Wimbledon Quarter Finals 1996
Richard Krajicek def Pete Sampras 7-5, 7-6, 6-4.
What a shit player Sampras was, a joke, never among the best.
I didn`t quite understand that. Do you think it has gotten slower or not?Yes it would... they were talking about the grass being slower even back in those days. It would have played like a clay court if that's gotten worse since.