Zen-like Todd Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Anyone else watching this? ..edit... it's over in straight sets. Nadal over Federer, 6-1, 6-3, 6-0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDRedskinsFan Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I just caught the tail end of the last match, and it looks like somebody is out there in a Federer suit playing in his place, because Nadal totally destroyed him. It's alright for Federer fans though, because he still controls Wimbledon every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Anyone else watching this?..edit... it's over in straight sets. Nadal over Federer, 6-1, 6-3, 6-0. Nadal CAN'T be beat on clay. No, way, no how. That being said, Federer seems to have lost a step this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I just caught the tail end of the last match, and it looks like somebody is out there in a Federer suit playing in his place, because Nadal totally destroyed him. It's alright for Federer fans though, because he still controls Wimbledon every year. I have a feeling that Nadal will beat him this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 I was watching this match, I was interested to see if Roger F. could finally beat Nadal on clay. Guess not..Nadal owns Federer on clay. But Federer will win Wimbeldon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted June 8, 2008 Author Share Posted June 8, 2008 Wimbledon will be interesting. Nadal has gotten to the finals there for the last two years, and given Federer a good match. I really wouldn't be surprised at all if he breaks through this year. Incidentally, Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer (Nadal turned 22 a couple of days ago, Federer turns 27 in August). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Wimbledon will be interesting. Nadal has gotten to the finals there for the last two years, and given Federer a good match. I really wouldn't be surprised at all if he breaks through this year.Incidentally, Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer (Nadal turned 22 a couple of days ago, Federer turns 27 in August). If Nadal wins Wimbledon this year, no question he'll be #1. But 4 straight French Opens is impressive. Last person to do it was Bjron Borg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Nadal is getting better every year, and Federer may be starting to fade ... these back-to-back French Open/Wimbledon matchups have been great tennis in the past few years, and I'll definitely look forward to it in a few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Nadal will soon be the best tennis player in the world, on any surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Rafael Nadal can only win on clay. So that makes him mediocre in my mind. Pete Sampras won on three different surfaces. Andre Agassi has won on all four. Roger Federer has won on three(although he's been to the French open finals multiple times). The only reason Nadal is ranked 2 is because he's the best player on clay. He just can't play on any other surface. That makes him mediocre. I'd say that in terms of versatility, Djokovic is the second best player after Roger Federer right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Rafael Nadal can only win on clay. So that makes him mediocre in my mind. Pete Sampras won on three different surfaces. Andre Agassi has won on all four. Roger Federer has won on three(although he's been to the French open finals multiple times). The only reason Nadal is ranked 2 is because he's the best player on clay. He just can't play on any other surface. That makes him mediocre. I'd say that in terms of versatility, Djokovic is the second best player after Roger Federer right now. Nadal has made it to the Wimbledon finals for two years in a row. He made it to the semis in Australia this year. He is getting better at the other surfaces.Djokovic is also very good, but it will be interesting to see what happens at Wimbledon. I think both of them are getting better year after year, and it will be fun to watch them take us into the post-Federer era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 Rafael Nadal can only win on clay. So that makes him mediocre in my mind. Pete Sampras won on three different surfaces. Andre Agassi has won on all four. Roger Federer has won on three(although he's been to the French open finals multiple times). The only reason Nadal is ranked 2 is because he's the best player on clay. He just can't play on any other surface. That makes him mediocre. I'd say that in terms of versatility, Djokovic is the second best player after Roger Federer right now. Regardless. If you can beat one of the best of all time 3 straight times in a major championship you are above mediocre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted June 8, 2008 Author Share Posted June 8, 2008 When you get to the Wimbledon final two years in a row, I'd say you're pretty solid on grass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Mac Patty Wack Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I wish an American could whip this pinko Europeans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhd24 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 I wish an American could whip this pinko Europeans. Why? The American's don't play any sort of game. These "pinko Europeans" are far better, more varied, conditioned, and smarter players than Roddick or Blake. You know why the US doesn't contend on clay? Because the players don't train, prepare, or care for it. Jim COurier loved clay court tennis. Ditto Agassi. Federer and Nadal are all time players. They'd crush any of the past great US players. James Blake is a total fraud who artificially inflates his ranking by playing every single minor torunament that none of the big player play. Andy Roddick could care less about clay court tennis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 An absolutely thorough whupping of the highest order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogNose Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Anyone else watching this?..edit... it's over in straight sets. Nadal over Federer, 6-1, 6-3, 6-0. Simply amazing. I thought it would have been a 5 set match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.