[QUOTE=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 958202, member: 377”]Again, I find myself quoting General Melchett in Blackadder goes Forth. It really sums up best though the factual inaccuracies and lack of knowledge you initially constantly pedal but then refuse to face up to when you’re caught out.
“If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through”.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for sharing your philosophy, pal. A “sorry” would have sufficed for me.
[QUOTE=“Il Bomber Destro, post: 958057, member: 2533”]Nadal has now won his last 15 slam games against Federer, Murray and Djokovic.
6 against Federer - 3 on hard, 2 on clay, 1 on grass.
5 against Murray - 2 on clay, 2 on grass, 1 on hard.
4 against Djokovic - 3 on clay, 1 on hard.
The greatest of all time.
[/QUOTE]
And how has he done against Steve Darcis mate ?
It would be a shame if Nadal is juicing-he comes across as a humble guy and is a great player but by the looks of things there seems little doubt that he is high as a kite.
Hardly mate, Nadal’s physicality seems a lot more brittle than the rest of them.
Federer has hardly picked up an injury in 14 years as a pro.
Murray and Djokovic can easily match Nadal in the work they put in on the court, what seperates them in battles is Nadal’s superior mental toughness.
Nadal has had to battle serious injury problems due to his style of play and has had to adjust his game accordingly. Nadal is the greatest tennis player ever, he has an iron will and superb temperament that gets him out of the most impossible situations, he has the greatest tactical mind, he’s had to adjust his game to become successful on other surfaces, he’s had to adjust his game to combat injuries, he’s had to adjust his game to turn around a hold Djokovic had over him for a while. But he’s also got the greatest racquet skills in the game, without question his forehand is the greatest shot in tennis, his backhand pass is the best in the game, his overhead volleys are the best in the game.
Djokovic is particular is a much more physical player, he’s a better retriever, he’s more energetic and he serves a lot better but Nadal has the stronger mentality and temperament, he’s got the better racquet skills and he’s got the better tactical brain. If the game went to 5 sets yesterday Djokovic looked the much fresher man and you’d have had to have favoured him.
What is so endearing about Nadal is the seeming mortality he has compared to the others, you just don’t know when injuries may kick in. Every game I watch Nadal play I know that if he is on his game and the injuries stay away there is absolutely no way he is getting beaten as he’s the greatest of all time. He has destroyed Djokovic, Federer and Murray in Grand Slam and this has brought a lot of bergudgers with it. It’s all very said.
I reckon of the so called ‘Big 4’ Novak is the only one of them that’s a sound man and a bit of a laugh.
Andy fulfils every grumpy Scot stereotype. I’m a grumpy sort myself so I actually find that quite appealing and like him a lot.
Federer like every successful and rich Swiss person is a prat. There’s never been a player like him as aesthetically pleasing to watch on court but off court can’t do either magnanimity in victory or graciousness in defeat. I actually suspect, he’s not the brightest. His comments after Novak beat him in the US Open Semi Final of 2011 win the gold medal prize in that regard.
Nadal is as cute as a fox in terms of showing humility and graciousness when a microphone is thrust in front of him. On court its a different story the gamesmanship is a throwback back to Jimmy Connors in his pomp. Constantly taking an age between points, a full towel down after every point, playing up injuries and at crucial junctures of a match getting the trainer on to break an opponents gathering momentum. This year’s Australia Open against Stan Wawrinka was a case in point. On that occasion both his opponent and the Melbourne crowd got on his case in a big way. Another one that sticks in the mind is the French Open final of 2011 when Federer had just won a set and the whole momentum of the final seemed to be shifting, there was a long hold up as Nadal had a strapping on his ankle reapplied which he claimed was too tight.
[QUOTE=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 958217, member: 377”]I reckon of the so called ‘Big 4’ Novak is the only one of them that’s a sound man and a bit of a laugh.
Andy fulfils every grumpy Scot stereotype. I’m a grumpy sort myself so I actually find that quite appealing and like him a lot.
Federer like every successful and rich Swiss person is a prat. There’s never been a player like him as aesthetically pleasing to watch on court but off court can’t do either magnanimity in victory or graciousness in defeat. I actually suspect, he’s not the brightest. His comments after Novak beat him in the US Open Final of 2011 win the gold medal prize in that regard.
Nadal is as cute as a fox in terms of showing humility and graciousness when a microphone is thrust in front of him. On court its a different story the gamesmanship is a throwback back to Jimmy Connors in his pomp. Constantly taking an age between points, a full towel down after every point, playing up injuries and at crucial junctures of a match getting the trainer on to break an opponents gathering momentum. This year’s Australia Open against Stan Wawrinka was a case in point. On that occasion both his opponent and the Melbourne crowd got on his case in a big way. Another one that sticks in the mind is the French Open final of 2011 when Federer had just won a set and the whole momentum of the final seemed to be shifting, there was a long hold up as Nadal had a strapping on his ankle reapplied which he claimed was too tight.[/QUOTE]
I would say most professional tennis players, like F1 drivers, are spoiled rich kids and the vast majority of them are utter, utter cunts.
[QUOTE=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 958217, member: 377”]
Nadal is as cute as a fox in terms of showing humility and graciousness when a microphone is thrust in front of him. On court its a different story the gamesmanship is a throwback back to Jimmy Connors in his pomp. Constantly taking an age between points, a full towel down after every point, playing up injuries and at crucial junctures of a match getting the trainer on to break an opponents gathering momentum. This year’s Australia Open against Stan Wawrinka was a case in point. On that occasion both his opponent and the Melbourne crowd got on his case in a big way. Another one that sticks in the mind is the French Open final of 2011 when Federer had just won a set and the whole momentum of the final seemed to be shifting, there was a long hold up as Nadal had a strapping on his ankle reapplied which he claimed was too tight.[/QUOTE]
Nadal’s display of sportsmanship against Wawrinka was a magnificent display of courage and selflessness. He played on despite a debilitating injury out of sheer respect for his opponent and good friend Wawrinka who seemed to be very grateful to Nadal after the game.
[QUOTE=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 958217, member: 377”]
Nadal is as cute as a fox in terms of showing humility and graciousness when a microphone is thrust in front of him. On court its a different story the gamesmanship is a throwback back to Jimmy Connors in his pomp. Constantly taking an age between points, a full towel down after every point, playing up injuries and at crucial junctures of a match getting the trainer on to break an opponents gathering momentum. This year’s Australia Open against Stan Wawrinka was a case in point. On that occasion both his opponent and the Melbourne crowd got on his case in a big way. Another one that sticks in the mind is the French Open final of 2011 when Federer had just won a set and the whole momentum of the final seemed to be shifting, there was a long hold up as Nadal had a strapping on his ankle reapplied which he claimed was too tight.[/QUOTE]
What about Nadal’s carry on when he was been beating off the grass in Wimbledon by Lucas Rosol? Trying to shoulder Lucas as they passed each other at the change of ends, giving out to the umpire because of the way Rosol was setting up to recieve his servre.
What a load of toss. The booing that was echoing to the rafters and Wawrinka’s reaction as the histrionics were unfolding tell a rather different tale from the spin you’re putting on it. Of course Nadal had previous in retiring early in Australian Opens. He ducked out in the 2010 Quarter Final when Andy Murray was two sets up on him and giving him an awful mauling.
This was a final and Wawrinka’s first tilt at a grand slam which was why Nadal soldiered on. It was a real classy gesture from Nadal and one which Wawrinka really appreciated in the end, it would be sad to have your only grand slam remembered in the history books as a default win but Nadal made sure it wasn’t. Some people may have thought it was gamesmanship but by the end it was quite clear it wasn’t.
And of course after the trainer is called out for the bad back, Wawrinka’s momentum and concentration is completely broken and there’s a Lazarus like recovery from Nadal to win the 3rd set.
After two weeks of attrition in a Grand Slam, a high proportion of players invariably turn up for the final carrying all kinds of knocks and wounds. They all see it out without the kind of histrionics we saw in Melbourne in January. Stefan Edberg in the 1990 Australian Open Final is the only player to have retired in a Grand Slam final in over a century.
Pete Sampras (that’s the guy who you don’t even rate as a great of the game) in the veteran stage of his career at the US Open Finals of 2000 & 01 could barely walk with a bad back by the time he got around to facing Marat Safin & Lleyton Hewitt in the finals. He got on with the job and we had none of the crude gamesmanship and deliberate and cynical attempt to break an opponents momentum we saw in Melbourne back in January.
[QUOTE=“Manuel Zelaya, post: 958696, member: 377”]And of course after the trainer is called out for the bad back, Wawrinka’s momentum and concentration is completely broken and there’s a Lazarus like recovery from Nadal to win the 3rd set.
After two weeks of attrition in a Grand Slam, a high proportion of players invariably turn up for the final carrying all kinds of knocks and wounds. They all see it out without the kind of histrionics we saw in Melbourne in January. Stefan Edberg in the 1990 Australian Open Final is the only player to have retired in a Grand Slam final in over a century.
Pete Sampras (that’s the guy who you don’t even rate as a great of the game) in the veteran stage of his career at the US Open Finals of 2000 & 01 could barely walk with a bad back by the time he got around to facing Marat Safin & Lleyton Hewitt in the finals. He got on with the job and we had none of the crude gamesmanship and deliberate and cynical attempt to break an opponents momentum we saw in Melbourne back in January.[/QUOTE]
Nothing cynical about it. Check Nadal’s service speeds in that game to his average beforehand, he was not moving, he was not competing for points like he usually does but he was playing through the pain out of pride and out of sportsmanship. Terrific class was shown by the Spaniard and Wawrinka seemed really humbled by it at the end of the game.
http://thetimesofcanada.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/3383426656_rafael-nadal.jpg
The two greatest.
[QUOTE=“Il Bomber Destro, post: 958719, member: 2533”]http://thetimesofcanada.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/3383426656_rafael-nadal.jpg
The two greatest.[/QUOTE]
I was thinking of buying that jacket. It’s pretty cool.
[ATTACH=full]1351[/ATTACH]
Borg, Sampras, Federer & Laver - the most exclusive of tennis clubs. 23 Championship titles between this quartet.
Nadal’s season plummeted to a new low yesterday, losing in the Round of 16 to Fabio Fognini in Barcelona. That’s Nadal’s second defeat to Fognini on clay in their two meetings in 2015. He’d never previously lost to him.
Out to 7/4 for the French.
Still free money
Really? Novak seems nailed on, no?
