That’s the problem with a lot of the players around Raonic, they just don’t have the mental toughness to beat Nadal. Zverev (the younger one) has both the game and the mentality to beat the likes of Nadal, unfortunately he hasn’t built up the necessary fitness/stamina levels yet to last a long 5 setter.
If Wawrinka beats Federer tomorrow and I think he will, he will win the tournament. He has the game to beat either Nadal or Dimitrov.
He’s played in 8 of the last 10 Grand Slams since winning his last at the French in 2014. He just hasn’t been very good for most of the last three years, as evidenced by his failure to make it past the quarter final stage in any of those 8 slams. Do you not have to be retired/absent for a long time for it to constitute a comeback?
He has played very well in Australia this past fortnight admittedly and has to be the tournament favourite now. Didn’t think an improvement in form constituted a comeback though.
I’d have my doubts as to whether its happened before. At a guess I’d say there’s only about 15 Grand Slams wins for players over 30 in the Open era. 2002 US Open is a possibility. Sampras v Agassi in the 2002 US Open Final is the only instance I can think of straight off, of two 30 somethings meeting in a final. I can recall Agassi beating Hewitt in the semi final. Can’t remember who Sampras beat in the other semi final, pretty sure it was a no-hoper unseeded player. I must look it up.
Wouldn’t that be Federer? Takes first year of his career. Reaches semi final at 35.
The hypocrisy from the Fed heads is staggering. Rafa has shown us time and time again his body is brittle, if he had the natural insusceptibility to injury of the likes of Federer, Djokovic and Murray then he would have won about 23/24 slams by now.
The ability of Federer to compete in 68 grand slam events and missing only 2 in 19 years of tennis raises far more eyebrows from a doping perspective than anything with Nadal. Yet you ignore that.