Nadal going down in the 1st round?

KowboyKarl

KowboyKarl

Live. Breathe. Blue.
How big of an upset is this? What were the odds on this match?

Just flipped to ESPN and saw this...one game for the match.
 
Monumental upset. I think he was around -5000 and never lost in the 1st round of a major and coming off a dominating French. No telling the odds of him losing in straights
 
Espn pundits spent about 10 mins yesterday bitching about how unfair the seeding was that these two would meet in the quartes..blame it on espn
 
Maybe the only silver lining out of Nadal going out in the 1st is it should definitively put to rest who the GOAT is
 
CAPital said:
Maybe the only silver lining out of Nadal going out in the 1st is it should definitively put to rest who the GOAT is
Click to expand...

hmmm not too sure because there a few ways to look at it. If Fed does retire within the next few years and Nadal continues to rack up the GS then we can't count him out. The greatest players in the game have been stunned, as was Federer so it's not like this has not happened before.

I think what makes this a bit more perplexing was that Nadal comes into this tourney as the hottest player this year with a record of 43-2, sweeping the clay court season as always seemingly putting an end to speculation that his injury would hold him back. But thus this happens.

At the age of 27, with knee issues, wrist/forearm issues, his clock is ticking.
 
Yeah, that's a huge upset.

Not that Nadal hasn't excelled everywhere at times, but I'm always amazed how players specialize on certain surfaces ... I get the speed difference, but it's all the same game. And I really want to play on a clay court, never have.
 
Lets not forget Nadal lost to Rosol in the 2nd Round last year. That's 2 years in a row now that's he's lick balls here. Once is a shocker, twice is a trend.
 
^Exactly. Even though he was injured last year, he still won the 4th set and looked in position to get the W heading into the 5th before getting rolled
 
These tennis players pull better than anyone, even better than golfers or NASCAR. When's the last time one of the politely whispering announcers noted the camera shot of a nervous girlfriend in sunglasses, and you said to yourself, "What a pig."?
 
tipyerbartender said:
These tennis players pull better than anyone, even better than golfers or NASCAR. When's the last time one of the politely whispering announcers noted the camera shot of a nervous girlfriend in sunglasses, and you said to yourself, "What a pig."?
Click to expand...

Tennis club totty is hot totty.
 
Nadal will be noted as the greatest Clay Court player ever
Djokovic and Fed will be in the talks of GOAT due to their versatility. If Nadal did not exist, Federer would be cleaning house. But the only reason why Fed won that lone French Open was he didn't play Nadal.

In regards to surface, it plays huge roll. A lot of latin americans/spaniards grew up on clay courts, the ball plays slower so thus faster players have a huge advantage it's not a great spot for big servers. Nadal has power, speed, agility and plays extremely well on the baseline. Thus very difficult for a player such as Federer who is very offensive and plays the winning shot.

Grass is much faster so thus players like Djokovic and Federer and any other player who hits a ton of winners will excel.
 
Toronto_Mike said:
Nadal will be noted as the greatest Clay Court player ever
Djokovic and Fed will be in the talks of GOAT due to their versatility. If Nadal did not exist, Federer would be cleaning house. But the only reason why Fed won that lone French Open was he didn't play Nadal.

In regards to surface, it plays huge roll. A lot of latin americans/spaniards grew up on clay courts, the ball plays slower so thus faster players have a huge advantage it's not a great spot for big servers. Nadal has power, speed, agility and plays extremely well on the baseline. Thus very difficult for a player such as Federer who is very offensive and plays the winning shot.

Grass is much faster so thus players like Djokovic and Federer and any other player who hits a ton of winners will excel.
Click to expand...

Not often said as we measure our dicks on the internet, but ... thank you , Toronto Mike. That makes sense. I still think I could beat my opponents on concrete, grass, or clay, but we're hacks.
 
you are right though, why can't you be good on all surfaces? But this is what makes Federer special his ability to make so many Grand Slam Semi's proves his longevity and his versatility as a player.
If you notice there aren't many big servers that last as a top tier player, opponents figure their game out very quickly. The problem with Nadal is that he is such a power guy and his body is taking a beating. Federer managed to suffer early in his career and understood how to keep long term health and success. Djokovic is the same, he was a fucker at a junior, I still think he cheats a bit, but he's on top of his game in terms of nutrition, conditioning as well as being an overall surface player.
Nadal beats Federer a lot of times due to having a psychological advantage. But in terms of skill, i would pick Roger well ahead of Rafa.

I am not too perplexed by this, if Nadal lost first round on clay or hard...well then we have an issue!
 
Is Fed the greatest ever? I would guess so

Also was the competition better in the 80s and 90s, or is Fed/Rafa just better than everyone else?
 
Tennis has aged well, I'm in awe of these guys, but you can't beat Borg/McEnroe/Connors/Lendl in the late 80's, twink. Those were drop down wars.
 
agreed with tipyer, Roger is good....damn good. His shots and his play were just ahead of everyone else and it took years before someone by the name of Nadal came into the scene. However, the problem with tennis now is that the parity is shot, it's the same shit all the time, whereas in the 80s and even early 90s you would see a lot of really really good players. It is nice to see that Murray has broken the dominance of Djokovic, Nadal and Federer but it just seems so predictable these days and can be rather boring.
 
BetCrimes1984 said:
Brilliant stuff. The Fed is past it, so it's Murray for the final.
Click to expand...

Prior to the start when I was looking over the prop list and saw Murray with a win/not win the Championship my instant reaction was to take the not win, didn't make the wager and kind of glad now despite many more matches. His side of the bracket is tougher than the other side but after today, nothing is a sure thing.
 
Toronto_Mike said:
agreed with tipyer, Roger is good....damn good. His shots and his play were just ahead of everyone else and it took years before someone by the name of Nadal came into the scene. However, the problem with tennis now is that the parity is shot, it's the same shit all the time, whereas in the 80s and even early 90s you would see a lot of really really good players. It is nice to see that Murray has broken the dominance of Djokovic, Nadal and Federer but it just seems so predictable these days and can be rather boring.
Click to expand...

I think I disagree with you on this one Mike. I think Tennis is thriving because the parity is stronger than it's ever been / while at the same time being "the same shit all the time". In order for a sport to succeed ... it needs superstars who are admired, revered and hated by the fans and their competitors. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic has been the face of tennis now for the better part of a decade and it would be hard to argue for anyone that the quality of play has ever been better. And even those these three players have dominated the sport, every once in a while, you see someone sneak through and grab a championship (Safin '05 Australian / Murray '12 Open / Del Potro '09 Open).

Their time of dominance though is just about over. Djokovic will likely have a few more in him but I'm not sure anyone else does beyond 2013. You'll likely get your wish as there are no dominating up and comers ... so those 50-1 shots at the start of majors just might hit.

To comment on GOAT - There was no greater, is no greater than Roger Federer. The way he composes himself on the court, the way he speaks off the court and his humanitarian work are unparalleled. Yes, his record will likely be the best ever, but there's more to him than just the Wins. (Although I can recall the one time I saw him lose his composure on court. I was STUNNED)
 
UMiamiCapper said:
I think I disagree with you on this one Mike. I think Tennis is thriving because the parity is stronger than it's ever been / while at the same time being "the same shit all the time". In order for a sport to succeed ... it needs superstars who are admired, revered and hated by the fans and their competitors. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic has been the face of tennis now for the better part of a decade and it would be hard to argue for anyone that the quality of play has ever been better. And even those these three players have dominated the sport, every once in a while, you see someone sneak through and grab a championship (Safin '05 Australian / Murray '12 Open / Del Potro '09 Open).

Their time of dominance though is just about over. Djokovic will likely have a few more in him but I'm not sure anyone else does beyond 2013. You'll likely get your wish as there are no dominating up and comers ... so those 50-1 shots at the start of majors just might hit.

To comment on GOAT - There was no greater, is no greater than Roger Federer. The way he composes himself on the court, the way he speaks off the court and his humanitarian work are unparalleled. Yes, his record will likely be the best ever, but there's more to him than just the Wins. (Although I can recall the one time I saw him lose his composure on court. I was STUNNED)
Click to expand...

that was no surprise because it was bound to happen. every tennis fan knows this that Murray has it in him, 2012 was huge for him. He kept on knocking on the door and finally broke through which made this a top 4 game. The problem now is that the next few guys in line, tsonga/ferrer still have a ton of work to do. Yes they have their favourite surfaces but they certainly do not like playing against the big boys.

I don't know how Tennis is thriving if all you have is 4-5 players who show up to each tournament, dominate it and then well the rest really have little chance. Why do you think bookies always provide that option then? Top 4 vs Field or Federer vs Field, Nadal vs Field, Djokovic vs Field, Murray vs field, but no one else? Why can't you have superstars like the 80s? Or even the 90s where there was Sampras and Agassi but you also had other the likes of Muster, Courier, Ivanisevic, Kafelnikov, Chang, Bugera, Rios, Krajicek....just to name a few, those guys all made each grand slam interesting. yes there were favourites to win a Slam but man oh man there were some good tennis in the early rounds because of these guys. It wasn't always 1 or 2 to battle it out, heck Sampras had to deal with Ivanisevic and Kraijceck on Grass, Agassi had to deal with Muster and Rios, Courier was someone no one wanted to play on hard. But today come on, French Open..it's Nadal's like automatically his. Hard courts is now more interesting, so is grass but still similar suspects.

But the other 2 men you listed, Safin....what happened to him? Dropped. Del Potro? I'd like for him to make a run again this tourney. The point is, there is a lack of longevity. Yes it's good to have the top 4 set the bar but then what? The rest of mens tennis is useless?

It's unfortunate to say but that's how women's tennis is like right now. Ever since Venus, Clijsters, Henin, Momo, Pierce, Davenport, it's been such a merry go around. Holy crap these guys can't serve for shit! You remember Dementieva? She the nastiest forehand but her serve....I swear I thought she was out of a rec league with that shit.

End of the day yes wonderful good to have those big boys around, but it would be nice to see that they are human. How often will you get a tourney that has the top 4 guys in it but none of them win it?
 
we can always make that arguement for any sport, "What if" Sampras or Agassi played Nadal or Federer, the technology has changed, training has changed...although I think Agassi would still be snorting some powder before a game and win. We can never know but admire.

I think we can agree that tennis is a fantastic sport, the development of the sport itself has been fantastic, it is so global now, there are more countries getting involved, heck I definitely think it is one of the most global games around behind, Soccer and Basketball. I just hope that the quality of play outside the big guns continues to develop...you have to admit you'd like to cheer for an underdog!
 
for sure I don't know what to say really, total fluke? What I'm really curious is the amount of walk overs and retirements happening.
 
Yeah Darcis withdrawal in particular is just insane to me. Evidently he injured himself early on in the Nadal match then proceeds to win without him really noticing/affecting him(adrenaline maybe) and then boom he WD. I guess it took a few hours after the match for the adrenaline to wear off for him to notice the severity of the injury cause he seemed fine in the post match interview
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top