Nadal vs Djokovic - Here we go!

Demonata · 06-11-12, 07:10 AM

Originally posted by jjgold

Joker is definitely better even on clay

I think it was more Joker missing shots than Nadal pressing him

Nadal is obviously better on clay. That's why he won 7 french opens...

Wulfman14 · 06-11-12, 07:10 AM

for all of you laughing at hte double fault, you must understand that he was rolling the dice and serving like it was a first serve. he took a chance . would a lows peed serve and rally have kept this match going ,we will never know

Demonata · 06-11-12, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by Wulfman14

for all of you laughing at hte double fault, you must understand that he was rolling the dice and serving like it was a first serve. he took a chance . would a lows peed serve and rally have kept this match going ,we will never know

Exactly it's not like if Djoker would of won that point he would of won the set anyway. Edge still would of been Nadal.

shari91 · 06-11-12, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by Wulfman14

for all of you laughing at hte double fault, you must understand that he was rolling the dice and serving like it was a first serve. he took a chance . would a lows peed serve and rally have kept this match going ,we will never know

I don't think we were laughing at Joker double faulting as much as laughing at the way the match ended. At least that was my reason. All that build up and rain delays for it to finish on a df is hilarious.

Luca Fury · 06-11-12, 07:13 AM

Originally posted by Wulfman14

for all of you laughing at hte double fault, you must understand that he was rolling the dice and serving like it was a first serve. he took a chance . would a lows peed serve and rally have kept this match going ,we will never know

Exactly. I had a feeling he was going to go for broke and try something risky like that, which is why I wrote "LOL if he double faults and loses." Then, that's exactly what he did.

I don't blame him, though. He kind of had to go for broke there and do something risky.

Wulfman14 · 06-11-12, 07:16 AM

novak will win the french open eventually. not like that fruitcake murray who will retire without ever winning a slam

baskets · 06-11-12, 07:18 AM

hey Brettel, suck it

Djoker is better than Nadal.... Fed will never beat Rafa again in Wimbledon.... and same for Djoker at FO.... the door has to be broken in.... and then it's all over

w/ Rafa it was a progression over Fed. same here w/ Djoker who is a superior player to Nadal

Sport_Fish · 06-11-12, 07:18 AM

Nadal went to hug his family and Pau Gasol right after the win...but didnt go to his girlfriend??

Demonata · 06-11-12, 07:20 AM

Originally posted by Wulfman14

novak will win the french open eventually. not like that fruitcake murray who will retire without ever winning a slam

Murray is a joke in Grand Slams. I remember a match recently he played where everytime he lost a point he grabbed his back like his back caused him to lose it but everytime he won a point he was fine. haha

Luca Fury · 06-11-12, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Demonata

Murray is a joke in Grand Slams. I remember a match recently he played where everytime he lost a point he grabbed his back like his back caused him to lose it but everytime he won a point he was fine. haha

That's Murray for you. He really gets on my nerved. I was made he even won a set against Djokovic at the Australia Open earlier this year. Novak playing so bad... Should have been 3-0 for him ins tea dog 3-1

baskets · 06-11-12, 07:30 AM

Originally posted by Demonata

Murray is a joke in Grand Slams. I remember a match recently he played where everytime he lost a point he grabbed his back like his back caused him to lose it but everytime he won a point he was fine. haha

ha ha. so true

if Murray doesn't describe a liberal to perfection, then I don't know what does

brettels · 06-11-12, 07:32 AM

baskets does it take a lot of energy being a moron in 98% of your posts?

RGG · 06-11-12, 07:33 AM

What a terrible match, IMO.

Luca Fury · 06-11-12, 07:34 AM

Andy Murray is the Tito Ortiz of Tennis. Always an injury, but ONLY when he loses.

"Oh, suddenly my back hurts... I can't move properly..."

"Oh, why is my head hurting now... My vision is blurry..."

"Oh, a hangnail... Now my grip is affected..."

Demonata · 06-11-12, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by Luca Fury

That's Murray for you. He really gets on my nerved. I was made he even won a set against Djokovic at the Australia Open earlier this year. Novak playing so bad... Should have been 3-0 for him ins tea dog 3-1

Problem with Murray is he does not have any real strengths that he does better than anyone else. He is good at rallys but thats really all I ever see from him. Does not have fighting mentality like Djoker,Nadal and Fed. So he will never excel without having a fighter in him.

Originally posted by baskets

ha ha. so true

if Murray doesn't describe a liberal to perfection, then I don't know what does

Sad to think that after Fed finally retires Murray will be in top 3 eventually.

Demonata · 06-11-12, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by Luca Fury

Andy Murray is the Tito Ortiz of Tennis. Always an injury, but ONLY when he loses.

"Oh, suddenly my back hurts... I can't move properly..."

"Oh, why is my head hurting now... My vision is blurry..."

"Oh, a hangnail... Now my grip is affected..."

If I remember correctly he even called the trainer once because he didn't like his burping.hahahahahaha.

He told the trainer he was burping too much and that's why he was getting the unforced errors.

Cheme82 · 06-11-12, 07:44 AM

Way to go Rafa! I'm glad it was also to end a chance for the Novak slam. If Federer and Rafa (who have dominated for so long) haven't gotten it, Novak definitely hasn't done enough to deserve it.

Hopefully Rafa gets it in his head that he can beat him (he should have won the Australian open this year), and he takes Wimbledon. He needs to realize that as hot as Novak's last 18 months have been, he is still the more accomplished player and perfectly capable of getting back to dominating. Novak has to prove he can maintain his domination.

Luca Fury · 06-11-12, 07:55 AM

Originally posted by Demonata

Problem with Murray is he does not have any real strengths that he does better than anyone else. He is good at rallys but thats really all I ever see from him. Does not have fighting mentality like Djoker,Nadal and Fed. So he will never excel without having a fighter in him.

Sad to think that after Fed finally retires Murray will be in top 3 eventually.

The nice tho sabot Murray is you can always count on him to get far in the tourney (somewhere around the semi-finals) and then bet Nadal or Djokovic against him at a relatively low price. Sometimes Federer against him too, although it depends on the price and situation since Roger doesn't do as well against him as the other 2.

Originally posted by Demonata

If I remember correctly he even called the trainer once because he didn't like his burping.hahahahahaha.

He told the trainer he was burping too much and that's why he was getting the unforced errors.

LOL... I joked with that hangnail example as an absurd exaggeration, but complaining burping is even more absurd. That's really something else, LOL

jjgold · 06-11-12, 08:08 AM

I still think Raffy has to play more aggressive vs Joker

Everybody else he runs them all over the court..Joker seems to stand in center of court and take batting practice

He seems scared..great win though

Demonata · 06-11-12, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Cheme82

Way to go Rafa! I'm glad it was also to end a chance for the Novak slam. If Federer and Rafa (who have dominated for so long) haven't gotten it, Novak definitely hasn't done enough to deserve it.

Hopefully Rafa gets it in his head that he can beat him (he should have won the Australian open this year), and he takes Wimbledon. He needs to realize that as hot as Novak's last 18 months have been, he is still the more accomplished player and perfectly capable of getting back to dominating. Novak has to prove he can maintain his domination.

Rafa better of won on the only surface he dominates on. You must hate Novak a ton to be glad that he did not win all the slams. Speaking of which Federer has done it before. To prove you wrong.

Hopefully Novak dominates in the other slams again. Novak is a better hard court player than Nadal hands down. How did Nadal prove he should of won the Australian Open? Fedderer is still the more accomplished player too but who cares. What matters is the present. Nadal has to prove he can win more than 1 grand slam in a year against Djokovic.

jjgold · 06-11-12, 08:25 AM

Fed does not have the fight that Nadal and Joker have

Nadal was serving for match in Aus Open

Joker of course better player

I really think Raffy going to have trouble even on Clay if he meets him next year during clay season

shari91 · 06-11-12, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by Demonata

Rafa better of won on the only surface he dominates on. You must hate Novak a ton to be glad that he did not win all the slams. Speaking of which Federer has done it before. To prove you wrong.

Hopefully Novak dominates in the other slams again. Novak is a better hard court player than Nadal hands down. How did Nadal prove he should of won the Australian Open? Fedderer is still the more accomplished player too but who cares. What matters is the present. Nadal has to prove he can win more than 1 grand slam in a year against Djokovic.

Cheme was referring to Djokovic holding all 4 titles at the same time. That's what he was playing for today. No man has done it since Rod Laver.

Demonata · 06-11-12, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by shari91

Cheme was referring to Djokovic holding all 4 titles at the same time. That's what he was playing for today. No man has done it since Rod Laver.

True, I thought he was referring to just winning one of each. Still wish Djoker would of been able to done it though. Think I was too pissed about the rain delays etc and being up at 5 am. I'm getting mad too quickly hahaha.

BettingWizard · 06-11-12, 09:29 AM

only on SBR can a guy lose 3-1 and still be called better than Nadal on clay.

makman · 06-11-12, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by jjgold

Fed does not have the fight that Nadal and Joker have

Nadal was serving for match in Aus Open

Joker of course better player

I really think Raffy going to have trouble even on Clay if he meets him next year during clay season

That is true if the game is played fully on one day without stoppage. Just like the way it has to be! Nadal having energy refilled after half of the game will help this pussy . His game is mostly moving around the court making the saves and waiting for the other to have errors. High bouncing balls, slow clay court makes him the best on clay. Such a pussy !!!

Joker is the best, better than prime of Federer. I remember top Federer was weaponless against this Nadal on clay.
But Joker is a killing machine on all types of surfaces.

shari91 · 06-11-12, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by makman

That is true if the game is played fully on one day without stoppage. Just like the way it has to be! Nadal having energy refilled after half of the game will help this pussy . His game is mostly moving around the court making the saves and waiting for the other to have errors. High bouncing balls, slow clay court makes him the best on clay. Such a pussy !!!

Joker is the best, better than prime of Federer. I remember top Federer was weaponless against this Nadal on clay.
But Joker is a killing machine on all types of surfaces.

Obviously there's no way to know but I truly believe that if they had played the entire match yesterday in normal conditions it would've been over in 3. Novak started how he did against Seppi and Federer but he's better than either of them so he could wake up and come back to win. Against Nadal on clay though you'd need divine intervention to do that after being down two sets and a break on clay. Nadal was in demolition mode and between Djoko's serve and him not handling the bounces, he was gone. Don't get me wrong: That rain helped me go from 0-4 on that match to 2-2 with my biggest bet winning. But I realise how absolutely lucky I got. It had nothing to do with me making decent picks.

If the exact same draw happened next year and we take away Djoko's grandfather dying during the lead up to RG, maybe it'd be different. But Nadal must've felt like the work he did on that time off he took so he could tinker with his game plan and add weight to his racquet - something Courier said was a massive deal at this stage in his career (messing with his racquet weight) and was solely to try to find a way to beat Novak - was all worth it when he won in Monte Carlo and Rome. His confidence would've been through the roof. Ideally they'll both reach the Final again next year, the weather will be perfect and there are no other factors involved so we can determine just how far Novak has come on clay.

EaglesPhan36 · 06-11-12, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by makman

Joker is the best, better than prime of Federer. I remember top Federer was weaponless against this Nadal on clay. But Joker is a killing machine on all types of surfaces.

Djokovic has to keep winning Slams/making Finals for several years to prove that point. One tremendous year and a good start to another does not a career better than Federer make. Let's remember before last year, Djokovic had plenty of issues even making Grand Slam finals. In about 2-3 three years, you might be able to assess where Djokovic's prime ranks - right now, not a big enough sample size yet and arguably he may just be entering his prime, but we shall see.

makman · 06-11-12, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by shari91

Obviously there's no way to know but I truly believe that if they had played the entire match yesterday in normal conditions it would've been over in 3. Novak started how he did against Seppi and Federer but he's better than either of them so he could wake up and come back to win. Against Nadal on clay though you'd need divine intervention to do that after being down two sets and a break on clay. Nadal was in demolition mode and between Djoko's serve and him not handling the bounces, he was gone. Don't get me wrong: That rain helped me go from 0-4 on that match to 2-2 with my biggest bet winning. But I realise how absolutely lucky I got. It had nothing to do with me making decent picks.

If the exact same draw happened next year and we take away Djoko's grandfather dying during the lead up to RG, maybe it'd be different. But Nadal must've felt like the work he did on that time off he took so he could tinker with his game plan and add weight to his racquet - something Courier said was a massive deal at this stage in his career (messing with his racquet weight) and was solely to try to find a way to beat Novak - was all worth it when he won in Monte Carlo and Rome. His confidence would've been through the roof. Ideally they'll both reach the Final again next year, the weather will be perfect and there are no other factors involved so we can determine just how far Novak has come on clay.

good writing shari ! If everything goes perfect next year, Nadal will be praying for rain

yisman · 06-11-12, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Wulfman14

novak will win the french open eventually. not like that fruitcake murray who will retire without ever winning a slam

I think Novak will win a french open but I also think murray will win a slam. He has some years ahead of him.

yisman · 06-11-12, 11:10 AM

Originally posted by Cheme82

Way to go Rafa! I'm glad it was also to end a chance for the Novak slam. If Federer and Rafa (who have dominated for so long) haven't gotten it, Novak definitely hasn't done enough to deserve it.

he had the best year in tennis I've ever seen. That's enough to deserve it. But not everyone that deserves it gets to do it.

Cheme82 · 06-11-12, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Demonata

Rafa better of won on the only surface he dominates on. You must hate Novak a ton to be glad that he did not win all the slams. Speaking of which Federer has done it before. To prove you wrong.

Hopefully Novak dominates in the other slams again. Novak is a better hard court player than Nadal hands down. How did Nadal prove he should of won the Australian Open? Fedderer is still the more accomplished player too but who cares. What matters is the present. Nadal has to prove he can win more than 1 grand slam in a year against Djokovic.

You made a few different points there, so let me take them one by one:

1) "Rafa better of won on the only surface he dominates on". Yes, you are right.
2) "You must hate Novak a ton to be glad that he did not win all the slams". It's not that I hate him a ton, it's just his fruity way of playing is irritating, and he's taken 3 majors from Rafa which would have tied him with Federer, and probably given him the Rafa slam. Speaking about "Insert name" slams:
3) "Speaking of which Federer has done it before". Federer has not done it before, the last time it was done Federer wasn't even close to being born but I believe Shari already explained that to you.
4) "To prove you wrong". Not even close, but thanks for trying.
6) "Hopefully Novak dominates in the other slams again". Hopefully not.
7) "Novak is a better hard court player than Nadal hands down". This one you got right, I'm proud of you.
8) "How did Nadal prove he should of won the Australian Open?" He was serving for match and had an easy backhand for championship point, that shot still haunts him. I'm actually glad they made them play in the shitty weather and Novak made a mini come back just so that Nadal felt that pressure and still won it. I believe it is better for his game and confidence than if he would have just won 3-0.
9) "Fedderer is still the more accomplished player too but who cares. What matters is the present." If you are talking about the best player ever you can't just focus on what people are doing now, you need to see what they have done before and wait to see what they will do after. Once they are retired then you can take a look at all their body of work and decide then.
10) "Nadal has to prove he can win more than 1 grand slam in a year against Djokovic." Nadal is 6-3 in majors against Novak, all of Novak's wins came in a 7-month stretch that was part of probably the best tennis year anybody has ever had. But the momentum he had last year is gone now, this year Novak is 36-6 with 2 titles (1 major), Rafa is 40-4 with 4 titles (1 major). This year's Wimbledon has a lot riding on it.

Cheme82 · 06-11-12, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by yisman

he had the best year in tennis I've ever seen. That's enough to deserve it. But not everyone that deserves it gets to do it.

I agree, I believe last year was the best anybody has ever seen. He didn't even make the final at the French Open (I believe that was the first time I ever cheered for Federer in my life) but the rest of the year was so amazing that he definitely gets my vote for the best year ever. That being said, if more stablished players like Roger and Rafa haven't done it, I don't think he should have either. None of the 3 have obviously done enough to win it because they haven't, I don't think Roger will ever do it. Rafa and Novak can still make it happen, but they both have huge obstacles (each other) in the way.

yisman · 06-11-12, 12:56 PM

if you're looking at it from that perspective, that you can only have "done enough" when you've accomplished it, then what you said earlier didn't really mean anything.

You said he hasn't done enough to deserve it. I said I think he has, because he's been so dominant. You responded that he hasn't done enough because he hasn't done it.

Well then, let's do away with "deserving" it.

won the aussie
semis at the french
won wimbledon
won the US Open
won the aussie again (for the third time total)
finals at the french

Cheme82 · 06-11-12, 01:20 PM

I said: "Way to go Rafa! I'm glad it was also to end a chance for the Novak slam. If Federer and Rafa (who have dominated for so long) haven't gotten it, Novak definitely hasn't done enough to deserve it."

I never said that Roger and Rafa deserved it, I said they have dominated for much longer than Novak and still haven't gotten it. We are talking about something that can be earned without any votes needed from anybody. It's not the Heisman, it's not subjective. Hold all 4 majors at one time and you have earned it. If you haven't done that then you don't deserve it.

yisman · 06-11-12, 01:23 PM

right, so no one deserves it. I'm just saying that it doesn't mean anything.

Deserve to me would be "He was playing well enough to deserve it, but it didn't happen for him."

I said they have dominated for much longer than Novak and still haven't gotten it.

Neither of them have dominated like Novak, and that kind of dominance would be what's needed to win it. So to me, Novak "deserves" it more than Nadal or Federer ever did, because it's not about having a good long career or being great for several years. It's about excellence over that one year.

So while obviously Nadal and Federer have had better careers to date, neither of them ever did what Novak has been doing recently.