The Ultimate FEDAL (Wars) Thread

[Moxie]

^ Yes, but I think we all agree that Roger was 2nd best on clay from 2006-probably 2011. I'm just reminding you of what the clay world looked like in 04-05, and Roger was just part of a more varied group. But Coria, Moyà, Gaudio and Kuerten all dropped off big-time after 2005. Don't think I don't realize this helped Nadal, as well. We haven't seen such a big field of clay-courters that strong since.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^ Yes, but I think we all agree that Roger was 2nd best on clay from 2006-probably 2011. I'm just reminding you of what the clay world looked like in 04-05, and Roger was just part of a more varied group. But Coria, Moyà, Gaudio and Kuerten all dropped off big-time after 2005. Don't think I don't realize this helped Nadal, as well. We haven't seen such a big field of clay-courters that strong since.

That's true...most those guys were on their way down when Roger was on his way up and they met a couple of times in the middle, but after that, it was all Roger, right behind Rafa , of course:blush:

 

[Moxie]

^ Yes, but I think we all agree that Roger was 2nd best on clay from 2006-probably 2011. I'm just reminding you of what the clay world looked like in 04-05, and Roger was just part of a more varied group. But Coria, Moyà, Gaudio and Kuerten all dropped off big-time after 2005. Don't think I don't realize this helped Nadal, as well. We haven't seen such a big field of clay-courters that strong since.

That's true...most those guys were on their way down when Roger was on his way up and they met a couple of times in the middle, but after that, it was all Roger, right behind Rafa , of course:blush:

OK, but how come I don't get a steak for recognizing that had Coria not gotten the yips and Kuerten's hips hadn't given out, and Gaudio hadn't scared himself by winning the FO that Rafa might not have just sailed into the #1 clay slot? Coria was only 23 in 05, and Gaudio was only 27. OK, Kuerten was 28 in the 2005 clay season, but that's still the edge of prime, if it weren't for injuries. Of course, Rafa and Roger would have emerged as #1 and #2 on clay shortly afterward, but would it have happened so fast if these guys hadn't ALL dropped out so quickly?

 

[Carol]

What about HC a and grass before 2006? who were best players on those surfaces?

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^ Yes, but I think we all agree that Roger was 2nd best on clay from 2006-probably 2011. I'm just reminding you of what the clay world looked like in 04-05, and Roger was just part of a more varied group. But Coria, Moyà, Gaudio and Kuerten all dropped off big-time after 2005. Don't think I don't realize this helped Nadal, as well. We haven't seen such a big field of clay-courters that strong since.

That's true...most those guys were on their way down when Roger was on his way up and they met a couple of times in the middle, but after that, it was all Roger, right behind Rafa , of course:blush:

OK, but how come I don't get a steak for recognizing that had Coria not gotten the yips and Kuerten's hips hadn't given out, and Gaudio hadn't scared himself by winning the FO that Rafa might not have just sailed into the #1 clay slot? Coria was only 23 in 05, and Gaudio was only 27. OK, Kuerten was 28 in the 2005 clay season, but that's still the edge of prime, if it weren't for injuries. Of course, Rafa and Roger would have emerged as #1 and #2 on clay shortly afterward, but would it have happened so fast if these guys hadn't ALL dropped out so quickly?

Because Rafa was already a freak and he was never going to be denied on clay. No steak for you .

 

[Moxie]

^ Oh, damn!

 

[mrzz]

What about HC a and grass before 2006? who were best players on those surfaces?

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

 

[mrzz]

Because Rafa was already a freak and he was never going to be denied on clay. No steak for you .

No steak for Moxie because this is not orthodox Fedal, but I agree with her, and I have to say that I am positively surprised by her objectivity.

I never touched this subject, but I always felt Kuerten could have changed the landscape on clay, at least untill 2006/7. People would bring up the one handed back hand, but his bh was extremely solid, and his dtl shot from that wing was scary to say the least. Given that he is tall, I think he would be a big problem for the young Nadal. I am not saying that he would win all of their matches, but I would guess he could win his fair share.

 

[Carol]

What about HC a and grass before 2006? who were best players on those surfaces?

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

What about HC a and grass before 2006? who were best players on those surfaces?

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

There were good players, like Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick , especially on grass but I see what Mrzz is saying. Roger was the one and only boss.

 

[mrzz]

What about HC a and grass before 2006? who were best players on those surfaces?

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

Of course they were good, some were damn good. But watch some matches, sometimes Federer seemed to be toying with people. And I meand people ranked in the top 5.

I will never even begin to understand how can some people say that in 2012 Federer was better than in 2004-2007. Smarter, yes? More experienced? Sure. But the explosion, the absurd sense of confidence he had in those days gave so much room to his natural talents, that the final result was miles ahead of what we see today.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

There were good players, like Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick , especially on grass but I see what Mrzz is saying. Roger was the one and only boss.

I've never could understood why Nabaldian having a superb game (to me better player than Roddick,Hewitt and Safin) he couldn't win any GS, incredible but true

If he had a quarter of Hewitt's drive, he might have won four or five...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

Of course they were good, some were damn good. But watch some matches, sometimes Federer seemed to be toying with people. And I meand people ranked in the top 5.

I will never even begin to understand how can some people say that in 2012 Federer was better than in 2004-2007. Smarter, yes? More experienced? Sure. But the explosion, the absurd sense of confidence he had in those days gave so much room to his natural talents, that the final result was miles ahead of what we see today.

His ability to turn defense into serious offense in those days was simply ridiculous...That's what he lost as years passed and that is no small thing. That is what Nole is doing today. You think you have the point won, you haven't...Roger was like that in those days.

 

[Carol]

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

There were good players, like Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick , especially on grass but I see what Mrzz is saying. Roger was the one and only boss.

I've never could understand why Nabaldian having a superb game as good as the best (to me he was better player than Roddick, Hewitt and Safin) he never won a GS, incredible but true

 

[Carol]

There were good players, like Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick , especially on grass but I see what Mrzz is saying. Roger was the one and only boss.

I've never could understood why Nabaldian having a superb game (to me better player than Roddick,Hewitt and Safin) he couldn't win any GS, incredible but true

If he had a quarter of Hewitt's drive, he might have won four or five...

I think he was not too much focus in tennis, I hear he likes and had other entertainments and also he didn't take enough care with his body gaining weight very easy

 

[Moxie]

Because Rafa was already a freak and he was never going to be denied on clay. No steak for you .

No steak for Moxie because this is not orthodox Fedal, but I agree with her, and I have to say that I am positively surprised by her objectivity.

I never touched this subject, but I always felt Kuerten could have changed the landscape on clay, at least untill 2006/7. People would bring up the one handed back hand, but his bh was extremely solid, and his dtl shot from that wing was scary to say the least. Given that he is tall, I think he would be a big problem for the young Nadal. I am not saying that he would win all of their matches, but I would guess he could win his fair share.

I still think I deserve the steak, because this is a Fedal vein that never been mined. And I'm a bit miffed that you are surprised at my objectivity, because I am capable of it. Kuertan could have stayed a factor for the reasons you say, had he not had the injury issues. Coria and Gaudio could have featured more, as well. That might have played into the Nadal clay numbers, even slams, which would have made it altogether different between Roger and Rafa. What I'm saying is that Rafa was the beneficiary of so many clay players going out at the same time.

 

[mrzz]

^Oh, I see now, my remark could be read in a different way than I originally intended.

I was not implying (please believe me) anything about your general objectivity. I was acknowledging the fact that you addressed directly a very tricky and sensitive subject for a Nadal fan, I would guess.

And repeat with me: Kuerten, Kuerten, Kuerten.

Oh, and not to forget: Rosol, Rosol, Rosol.

P.S. In your original possible steak winning post, it all goes down to what you meant with your sentence which ends in "helped Nadal". If you are only saying that the absence of the previous best clay courters helped him win tittles on clay, that's just logical (and you forgot Ferrero's injuries). If you wanted to consider the Fedal implications of this, however, then I could support your steak claims.

For at least 15% of the steak, obviously.

 

[Federberg]

In 2004 and 2005 there were no best playerS on those surfaces, but one best player.

What about the other players, they were not enough good?

Of course they were good, some were damn good. But watch some matches, sometimes Federer seemed to be toying with people. And I meand people ranked in the top 5.

I will never even begin to understand how can some people say that in 2012 Federer was better than in 2004-2007. Smarter, yes? More experienced? Sure. But the explosion, the absurd sense of confidence he had in those days gave so much room to his natural talents, that the final result was miles ahead of what we see today.

I totally agree. From commentators who should know better! I accept that Roger has to say he's better, but I doubt he truly believes that. The guy was simply untouchable at one point. To be a fan of a player who was virtually invincible was a true pleasure. No stress, just entertainment. How things have changed!

 

[Carol]

^Oh, I see now, my remark could be read in a different way than I originally intended.

I was not implying (please believe me) anything about your general objectivity. I was acknowledging the fact that you addressed directly a very tricky and sensitive subject for a Nadal fan, I would guess.

And repeat with me: Kuerten, Kuerten, Kuerten.

Oh, and not to forget: Rosol, Rosol, Rosol.

P.S. In your original possible steak winning post, it all goes down to what you meant with your sentence which ends in "helped Nadal". If you are only saying that the absence of the previous best clay courters helped him win tittles on clay, that's just logical (and you forgot Ferrero's injuries). If you wanted to consider the Fedal implications of this, however, then I could support your steak claims.

For at least 15% of the steak, obviously.

Hmmm, then maybe we also could say that the absence of previous best HC and grass courters helped Federer win tittles on both surfaces, is that logic? or is it another Fedal implication?

 

[mrzz]

^If that was the case, yes it helped. But read what Moxie wrote: she noticed the absence of former champions that, career ending issues aside, should be there. If that applies to grass and HC too, then yes, it would have helped Federer as well.