nieminen is an old favourite at stockholm. he is almost playing with home court advantage. with his current form, he can go for a surprise title win here...

I thought Niemine is from Finland, and Stockholm is in Sweden.

yes, that's why i said almost. he is popular in sweden, coming from a neighbouring country, and he played well in stockholm before.

Sorry croc, I realised after I posted it that you weren't suggesting that Nieminen was Swedish.

berrer must be the most massive man on tour. still he moves pretty well. he took the first set against nieminen, deservedly...

dent doesn't count cause he's too big to run

Nieminen came back and gave him an all-court lesson

upset warning against berdych if he can keep the ue's low and keep being aggressive

don't know ricky what you have against bellucci. he played great indoor hard tennis at stockholm last year, and certainly didn't look like a clay courter...

robredo is playing dreadful... yawn!

as you know from some of my comments in the past, I dont have anything against Bellucci

but he is nothing special on an indoor hard court

filip prpic has some mighty calf muscles, quick guy!

i hope bellucci proves you wrong the night ricky but i can't be arsed to sit up and root for him... should be a good match with blake!

winner: Blake

i give you right ricky! managed to see some of the match afterall, left at 4-4 in the third cause it was so boring. about bellucci: nothing special on indoor hard. your opinion was spot on! what an odd game style with that horse kick serve added to his defensive passive game overall....

amazing how little blake was running compared to his younger opponent and still won the match. reminded of ljubicic beating murray a couple of weeks back, although ljubicic was miles better.

blake should be sent packing in his next match or i eat my hat!

classy Roger. love you

croc, Blake won todays' match as well.. Do you have a hat to eat?

I hope he reaches the semifinal against Söderling!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/497454-roger-rafa-and-the-weak-era- idea

irrelavant may be so sorry for that but its a good read nonetheless :)

yum! well done by blake who won the decider 7-6 against a guy playing in his third match on tour, the worst match of the year.

blake has 0.01% chance against nieminen...

vamosrafa, 10/21/10 5:24 PM A very perceptive piece. I had missed that one but have to say he puts forward some very valid arguments.

Blake just got bageled by Nieminen

6-0 6-2 Nieminen. Should be a nice semifinal Söderling-Nieminen tomorrow!

i want my hat back

Whoa ... what happened to Soderling?
Home soil and that match would have put him in the WTF.

A hilarious moment during the changeover, when Federer had just been broken by Warwrinka for the second time, over the sound system came the song 'Don't worry about a thing....' A coincidence, or somone with a dry sense of humour?

vamosrafa, 10/21/10 5:24 PM
yes: a very good piece
and do read on through the comments as Tim Ruffin makes many more insightful comments

Ha ha ed ... Stany just great atm.

If I may permit myself one long post, one long quote actually, it is from one of the follow-on comments Tim Ruffin makes after that same Bleacherreport article...

I'm posting it because personally I have not seen anyone argue this point... this well... (not something I would have posted a few months ago here):

---
from http://bleacherreport.com/articles/497454-roger-rafa-and-the-weak-era- idea

You also assume that Federer would have corrected his h2h with Nadal had they played more on Federer?s favorite surfaces. I think that this is a baseless claim. First, Nadal won the pair?s very first encounter at the age of 17 in Miami, a medium paced hard court and one that Federer loves. The result was 6-3,6-3, a decisive straight sets victory. They played again the following year on the same court, Nadal, then 18 years old, and playing in his first Masters 1000 Final, took a commanding 2 sets lead with chances to win the match in straight sets. He got tight (you can hardly blame an 18 year-old for getting nervous when he?s about to close out the world #1), Roger took advantage and rallied. Roger won the second match but he definitely struggled to do so, on surface. The following year the two played again on a quick hard court in Dubai, in the Final. Federer was a three time defending champion. He raced to a 6-2 first set, Nadal steadied his game and won the next two a routine 6-4,6-4. This is a 19 year-old Nadal with a very clay court game still. Yet he won two of the pair?s first three matches on Federer?s preferred surface, and the only loss could?ve been a victory. So what I see is that Nadal even when he was an incomplete player, was beating Roger Federer not just on clay but on hard courts as well. And as a teenager. Mind you 2005-2007 (though I?d include 2008 as well) Federer was arguably as good as he?s been. Nadal was half the player that he is now, yet Rafa was more than capable of beating him on hard courts. I?m sure that you will point to the 2006 and 2007Master Cup SF?s in which Federer defeated Nadal in straight sets both times. You can take that as a sign if you?d like that Roger was capable of beating him. I however don?t buy it. I think we can spin things all that we like, but Rafa has always struggled at the year ending championships. Both 2006 and 2007 he almost went out to other players in the Masters Cup field and barely qualified for the SFs. Obviously, Rafa plays a lot of matches over the course of a year. He was a young guy who hadn?t yet learned to manage his schedule properly. To me, and to the television commentators who covered both matches, Nadal looked tired. If you look at his statistics, Nadal was averaging 80-90 mathces a year during that span. By the end of the eyar he had little left in the tank. Now, that?s not Federer?s fault but honestly I think he knows that he wasn?t facing a full strength Nadal. Add that to the fact that Shanghai was using a very fast, very new plastic surface as a hard court (one which Nadal protested against in 2005) it definitely provided an advantage to Roger. Also, notice that this surface was never used anywhere else on tour, and is no longer used in Shanghai now. On a normal day when both guys are physically fit, on a hard court I give the advantage to Rafa Nadal. Even the Nadal of 2006 or 2007 would beat Federer on a hard court, fast or slow. It would be a high quality match, but I?ve been watching these two play for a while. As a coach I scout player and recognize match-up problems and spot weaknesses. As great a player as Roger is he does have a few micro-weaknesses that Nadal understands and exploits to great effect. Roger only likes long rallies against guys who hit the ball big. He can simply redirect the ball with a little spin. He like flatter hitters because it?s easier for him to use hit slice effectively off of a ball that doesn?t have a ton of rotation. He like playing against guys who he has a decided movement advantage over. Rafa uses heavy spin which make it harder for Fed to slice consistently with confidence. Nadal is faster than he is and more consistent, plus he?s stronger which means he can rally forever. Federer knows this and it frazzles him. His targets become so small, and he has to play above his normal game to stay with Nadal. Nadal on the other hand can play his normal game and beat Federer. That?s why even at 17 years of age this was a tough match-up for Roger. Roger needs to be at an extraordinary level, painting the line with winner after winner, and he needs to keep it up for a long time against Nadal to be able to beat him. On a court with a true bounce, like a hard court his chances against Nadal are 4 in 10 at the highest. On a slow clay court you?re talking 2 in 10. But on a slick grass court, where everything stays lower his chances climb. I was actually quite surprised in 2006 that after winning the first set at love, that Federer didn?t snuff Rafa out in straight sets. After the first set, the match was quite a big more competitive that I expected. Even though Roger won that match, that was the very that let me know that Rafa was going to surpass him eventually. Nadal was using a clay court style on grass to trouble the best grass court player of his generation. Low and behold, as Rafa matured and continued to add to his game he got closer and closer to Federer even on grass. Finally catching him in 2008. Right now, if we took the Rafa that won Wimbledon this year and matched him up with Federer from 2007 on grass, I?d put my money on Nadal. So I don?t see where any real evidence points to Roger most likely reversing the head to head if the two had played more on other surfaces. I think a lot of people look at the record, they see 3-3 h2h on hard courts and 2-1 on grass, but they either didn?t see the matches or understand the context. Numbers without a proper context can mean anything, can be made to prove anything. When both guys are fit, and playing on a neutral surface Nadal has a decided advantage. If Nadal is not 100%, then I think it?s possible for Federer to upset him. But when I look at how these two have played in their Grand Slam meetings, great tennis was produced, the matches were certainly competitive, but after the 2005 French Open meeting, I?ve never doubted that Nadal would prevail. Simply because he?s the steadier player, and he doesn?t need to play outside of his normal game to beat Roger Federer. The same is not true in reverse. As weird as it is to say, Roger?s normal game will not get the job done against Nadal.

chlorostoma, thanks a lot for posting this, I subscribe to the Bleacher Report, but I haven't seen this one yet.

It is true that numbers on their own don't tell the whole story, if people carefully watch the matches, they can draw better conclusions from them. The writer has argued the case for Rafa very comprehensively, and it's great to see someone make the points that no one else ever makes.

The bottom line is Rafa is the best player so far that I have seen in tennis, and I have been watching tennis for a lon, long time. When he loses, it's because he is not in full flow for various reasons, but when he is playing at 100%, no one can shift him.

thank you, nadline

and it is vamosrafa who posted the link to that article here... and when I came across that comment I thought it needed to be seen here in rafa zone...

and if you're interested, read a little further down among those comments... there is a point where Tim writes that in the last few years Federer has been a little stubborn and arrogant to improve as he needed to keep improving... among others to keep up with Rafa but also with the other players... and that he also neglected to keep his net game really sharp...


To me there lies perhaps the most poignant thing about Roger and Rafa. They both have started with tremendous potential, both worked extremely hard...but only one of them has never let up doing everything possible and intelligently to reach for his potential and by all signs he will continue to do so for years, while the other did a lot less of that from around the time he got close to the middle of his prime... and in that lies the, may I use the word?, somewhat tragical side to Roger's otherwise glorious career... had he been less stubborn etc then the last few years and the coming few would have played out quite differently for him. (And those are the two only things I have ever faulted Roger for: his stubborness and his arrogance. Not that these are one-sided: the stubborness has a good portion of tenacity in it and the arrogance an crucial portion of self-confidence... but the other parts of them is what has hurt Roger in ways that were preventable. With difficulty, but possibly. Lack of consistent coaching was part of what Tim writes about.

And as I've just typed this Federer has just missed a voley for which he was well-positioned and did not have to run for... and wawrinka is possibly getting a breakpoint to even the third set...

Well, Wawa has dropped his serve in the 3rd, and smashed his racquet to boot. So after a very good 1sr set from Wawa, Roger has taken control and is now leading 5.2 in the 3rd, and about to serve for the match.

impressive by federer to come back and turn the match around. wawrinka must be furious he had the match in this hands...

Wawa was playing so well until he let Fed back into the match in the second set, and then it was downhill for him. I was looking for a very competitive 3rd set to see if Wawa could pull off the upset, but nada.

I've just finished watching the 2006 Dubai Final match, on DVD, for don't know how many times now, and Fed was really TMF then. His forehand, backhand, serves and his volleying skills were so good back then. Yes, his volleying was so much better than now. Like what chlorostoma mentioned, Fed had stopped improving after he became TMF, while Rafa was constantly improving and it was no surprise that Rafa had first caught up with Fed on the grass courts and now, he had done so too on the hard courts. In the past, Rafa had difficulty getting past some of those flat hitters and that's why he didn't get to meet Fed more often on the hard courts. Like I'd mentioned before, if Rafa could get past the field and met Fed on the fast hard courts, he would have also gotten past the field to meet Fed on the slower hard courts. Even if we were to agree that Fed was better than Rafa on the fast hard courts, their H2H on the hard courts overall would still be about even, as Rafa could get the better of Fed on the slower hard courts; unlike what some people thought, that Fed would have a better H2H over Rafa if they had met more on the hard courts. One thing I've noted, Rafa fared well against Fed who has SHBH, but Rafa fared badly against James Blake & Youzhny in the past, who also happened to have SHBH, I wonder why. Do they hit flatter shots than Fed or is it that they have stronger backhand than Fed?

Concerning Stan the Man, I always have a feeling that he is in awe of Fed and each time when he manages to move ahead of Fed in a match, he'll come back down and lose in the end. That Monte Carlo victory over Fed was the exception than the norm, as I think even Stan couldn't believe it himself.

@luckystar
i think the reason why nadal faired better against federer than blake or youzhny is because federer slices his backhand more. Nadal murders slice.(partially due to the way he hits his forehand) Thats why I think federer struggles against nadal. Not because of the high bounce of his forehand(which is what most people think) but because nadal neutralises his slice.(which is one of his best shots)

I see, thanks tj. I wonder why Fed is so stubborn then, why can't he hit like Blake or Youzhny when he faces Rafa. Regarding Fed's backhand slices, yes, I remember now that one of the commentators did mention about Fed's backhand slices were ineffective against Rafa, (I think that was mentioned during the AO 09 final, and they showed how Fed's slices were so effective against Delpo in the QF that AO) Rafa would simply use his forehand against Fed's slices and hit them down the line and Fed was then caught out of position and failed to return Rafa's down the line forehand shots.

"I wonder why Fed is so stubborn then, why can't he hit like Blake or Youzhny when he faces Rafa."

I think Blake and Youzhny use a different grip to federer. I think they use semi-western backhand grip. I think wawrinka and gasquet use the same grip. This means they can handle topspin better than federer,but they have less variety off that wing. Thats why I think those guys have less problems with nadals forehand than federer.(though they still lose the vast majority of the time) Regarding federer's slice,yes its ineffective against nadal. Federer's slice was the reason he was dominate the game in his prime. When he plays nadal,he cant play his normal game to win.

chlorostoma: what an interesting post! Thanks. Especially so regarding Fed's stubborness and arrogance" and how, as with most things, in life that can be both positive and negative. I can't stand Fed's attitude towards Andy but I recognise what a wonderful tennis player he was. Perhaps he was just over- endowed with talent and felt he didn't need to change his game in order to beat everyone else. And I suppose at one stage in his career that was true, but not any more. Inevitably he'll have to retire at some stage, pax Munster! I wonder what rout he'll take.

Yeah something to do with the grip. I agree that Fed when facing Rafa, can't play is normal game to win. tj, I hope to get your opinion about Murray vs Fed. Murray didn't have what Rafa has to trouble Fed, yet he can beat Fed eight out of the thirteen times they met. What do you think Murray did right to beat Fed?

luckystar: Andy is simply a tennis genius, no need to ask tj ;)

vamosrafa,

I am late in coming back and thanking you for providing that link to the article on bleacher report. I found it quite fascinating!

@luckystar
Here is my theory as to why Federer struggles with Murray. Murray counterpunches quite a bit as you know. Historically, Federer can be baffled by very good counterpunchers who can vary the spins and a lot. They make his targets small, and entice him to go for a little too much and he can make a lot of errors. You can see that throughout his career he's gone through some strange periods against Nalbandian, Guillermo Canas, and Gilles Simon. Federer can be very hit or miss against these players. If he's feeling it, he can hit a lot of winners against them and smoke them off the court. But if he's off his game just a little bit that type of player can beat him. It just so happens that Murray is probably the best counterpuncher in the world. However, we can see that as was the case in Australia this year Fed can get hot and smoke him as well.

@native, how have you been doing fellow? :) ..and i am glad u guys enjoyed the link ..

@chloro, thnx for posting ruffin's comments :)

tj, I do notice that those guys that trouble him the most are the good counterpunchers. That's why Rafa, Murray and Simon have positive H2H against Fed. Even Monfils and Ferrer managed to get a set off Fed even though they can't beat him. I must add that Rafa is no longer a counter puncher now, as he chooses to attack more aggressively now, unless he is really off his game where he'll revert back to defensive play( like his match against Melzer in Shanghai).

So, tj, if that's the case for Murray vs Fed, what do you think of Fed's A game vs Murray's A game at this point? (I'm not talking about Fed as TMF). Has Murray overtaken this Fed now? What about Nole vs Fed, if both are playing their A game now, who beats who? I'll like to think that Nole can beat Fed now, as I think Nole's ground strokes are more powerful than Fed's now and Nole is quick around the courts to get to the balls Fed hits at him. However where anticipatory skill is concerned, I feel that both Rafa and Murray are better than Nole. What do you think?

deuce, 10/23/10 8:02 AM I cant find the exact quote at the moment but at some point he actually said something along the lines of 'Sometimes I cant believe the talent that flows out of me'. Even now, he looks affronted when he loses a match and I sometimes think he is still wondering how anybody manages to beat him, rather than concentrating on what he has to do to beat them.

i still think fed's A game has an edge over nole's A game ...nole tries to match roger shot for shot and btoh play similarly in a sense that they try to take time away from each other by standing near the baseline and taking the ball early...fed is the master of doing this so i give him the edge... nole needs to add some dimensions ; some tools that can disrupt roger's rhythm like murray and nadal do ..nole is a great shot maker so he can match federer for hours but he allows fed to get into a good rhytm and fed in a good rhythm is LETHAL on quick courts.

Vamosrafa, I think Nole still lack some anticipatory skill. I think where reading Fed's game is concerned, Rafa and Murray fare better than Nole. It seems that the two of them anticipated Fed's moves very well while Nole couldn't do so. I guess Rafa and Murray worked to trap their opponents whilst Nole tries to outhit them. Maybe that's the difference between counter punching vs outright attacking. I feel that Nole and Fed and also Delpo are similar type of players, except that Fed during his TMF days was so good that he often out manoeuvre his opponents and they often saw the ball just fly past them.

deuce, here is a gem for you re Andy / Federer:

I'm so Fed up with all this talk of Murray, says Roger after proving he is still the man to beat

By Mike Dickson
Last updated at 9:21 PM on 23rd January 2009

Roger Federer speaks four languages - but whether it is in English, German, French or Swiss-German, he is fed up of being asked about Andy Murray.

While Murray was preparing for his Australian Open second round match against Marcel Granollers today, Federer was explaining his exasperation at the topic of the British No 1's recent superiority constantly being brought up.
Evgeny Korolev

Hot shot: Roger Federer overshadowed Evgeny Korolev in a straight-sets win in his Australian Open first round match.

'You have four or five years where everybody praises you for all the things you do and then, all of a sudden, you have to answer questions about other players and about what problem you have with them. When you have to do that in every country and in all the languages I speak it's not much fun, I can tell you.

'Andy's a great player, I've said it 100 times. After the 10th time I'm asked to say it another way - that's what I don't like.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1126407/Im-Fed-ta lk-Murray-says-Roger-proving-man-beat.html#ixzz13CLFeced

@nadline , 10/23/10 5:59 PM
---Federer: "...you have to answer questions about other players and about what problem you have with them. When you have to do that in every country and in all the languages I speak it's not much fun"---

It reminded me that Rafa has to answer the same questions about Federer in every country & on every tournament, often in English & Spanish at the same press conference. He answers also in Mallorqui language on his native island Mallorca (the local media). Rafa is still always polite towards the media and praises Federer.

We know how fond Roger is of playing mind games and that he's the the Master of the back-handed compliment with a sting in the tail. I guess we all have our favourite quotes from him (I have a large folder of them) but let's not incite you-know-who to start spamming by bringing them out here or risk a bloodbath with the FedUps. Maybe Cheryl could be persuaded to do a blog on the subject one of these days and we could all have a field day :-)

vamosrafa,

Nice to see you, too!

I agree with luckystar about Nole having more trouble when he plays Fed than either Murray or Rafa. I think he does try to simply outhit Fed, rather than changing his strategy and attacking some of Fed's weaknesses. Rafa brilliantly went after Fed's backhand repeatedly in the 2009 AO. He showed the rest of the field that there is a weakness in Fed's game that could be exploited. I think the great advantage that Rafa has always had over Fed, is his fearlessness. He has never been intimidated by Fed, even when he was just coming on the scene. That is a powerful weapon against one of the most dominating players ever in this sport.

Nole needs to think when he's on the court, not just react. Rafa is a superb strategist and has always been able to make adjustments mid-match. It's interesting that the mental issues that sometimes can plague Murray on court, seem to disappear when he plays Fed in the smaller tournaments. Murray should try to have that same focus and concentration in slam events.

It's always been obvious that Rafa and Fed have very different ways of coping with the probing, and sometimes annoying, questions from the media. Rafa is more than respectful of his opponents and has no problem acknowledging it. For Fed I think it's a different thing entirely.

thank you for the kind words re my posts

native, I think also that Rafa's mental strength has always been a major ingredient... I still marvel at his fearlessness in his early years on the atp and it has not let up... then this is combined with him constantly learning and improving as a result, and with that and supporting it his tennis intelligence... he is a genius in tennis just as Andy and Roger are... they are just each different types of geniuses... it took a while for many people to catch on to Rafa being this deeply intelligent about tennis... so much they were blinded by the powerful radiance of Federer's dominance and brilliance on court and by the first thing they tended to notice and focus on in Rafa's game, namely his physicality... but his mental strength was there to be noticed at all times... and the intelligent if you care to look more closely...

For many years it seems to me one of Roger's overriding mental concepts of himself on court has been that he was superior to every single player... that no-one could beat him unless he gave the game away on a particular day... and this was almost true (at least the results of the matches were) for several years with almost the only exception the matches against Rafa. With that he kept saying that this would be the year he would beat Rafa in a masters tournament and at the French Open... he just needed a little tweaking.

Like I wrote before, to enjoy such success and dominance, and this compounded with being lavished with endless compliments, with writers searching for ever new ways to laud your achivements, your brilliance, your genius, your speaking 4 languages, and so on... and making 8 figures each year... this is extremely hard to take and remain humble and down to earth for most people... here is where Nadal was lucky 60% (or pick your number) in the way his uncle and the rest of his family raised him and lucjy 40% to have taken in the teachings and made them his own... I've been watching both as a hawk for almost 6 years now and I have yet to see how all of Rafa's fame and success on court and money and adoration from millions have gotten to his head.

Coming back to Roger, peel back a thin layer from what he says and he seem to still be saying almost the same thing: when I am on court I am the one that is suppsoed to win, even now that I am a bit older... and when I don't it's because i have been a little unlucky or ... etc... OK he is not quite saying this, he is acknowledging somewhat that he is a bit older and slower but barely - he seems to just about still say what he used to say.... so to wrap up my rambling: had Roger has the fortune of growing up to be truly humble by the time he was 18 20 or 22 ie before he started winning big then in the last 4 years (his decline started slowly in 2007 before the YOTM - the year of the Mono) he would have been trying to improve all the time like a Rafa and adjust his game to ways to beat his main opponents etc... and we would have seen truly one of the most phenomenal players of all time come about as close to his potential as Rafa is doing... and we would not be hearing this individual blessed with such gifts, health, success, wealth and accomplishments go around so often putting down all kinds of other players around him with distortions of the truth and with a true lack of grace... are those statements not coming from his distorted view of things which goes back to his arrogance and stubbornness? What a shame! Again: this is not taking away anything that he has accomplished, and believe me, were I in his shoes I might have turned out a lot less graceful and humble than he is, it is just that he is in this respect human, far too human.

chlorostoma: I had never thought in terms of Roger not developing to his full potential. But how right you are. Instead he relied on his natural talent, incredible shot making, and uncanny ability to produce an ace at crucial moments without paying sufficient attention to how the game was developing and the new generation of contenders.

Like you I have followed both players closely since it first became apparent that Nadal was capable of taking on TMF. Until that famous night at Wimbledon I am sure Roger believed that sooner or later Rafa would burn out (as many people predicted) or simply go away. The notorious crying episode at the AO was provoked by frustration and marked the moment when it finally dawned on him that Rafa stood between himself and ever more entries in the record books. We will never know what would have happened if Rafa had not been derailed by injuries for a large part of 2009 but one has a sneaky suspicion RF might still be trying to surpass the Sampras slam record. As it is he boasts about his incredible success that year in winning RG and Wimbledon back to back.

But later today he will undoubtedly notch up his 19th 250-title which will be his 64th ATP title and will mean he ties with Sampras at 4th in the overall list of ATP titles held.

nadline: that's just priceless! My dearest wish is that Andy defeats Fed in a grand slam in 2011.
chlorostoma: another brilliant post and I really like the way that you, while being critical of Fed, are also generous in your praise.I think he is/was a magician on court- just don't want him to come to tea, is all!

chlorostoma,

That was a brilliant, thoughtful post! You gave me quite a bit to think about. It never occurred to me that Fed's inability and unwillingness to adapt to the rising young players would end up costing him dearly. I remember after Rafa's great win at the 2009 AO, many sports analysts and pundits became very critical of Fed for not being flexible or willing to make adjustments as Rafa kept finding and exploiting weaknesses in his game. They didn't understand why Fed refused to try and change his tactics in that final. It was a match that, on paper, Rafa was sure to lose. He had never won a hardcourt slam event, he was playing on one day's rest after a brutal five set marathon with Verdasco and there was no way that he would have the stamina to hang with Fed. Well, we all know how that turned out. Rafa came in knowing exactly what he needed to do and he did it. How he did it, I don't know if we will ever know. Maybe Rafa doesn't even know where he found the strength to make his exhausted body do what it did in that match. That was the loss that seemed to break Fed's back. It was the last straw. I like to call it Rafa's "no excuses slam win". After that, what was there to say? The match was Fed's to win. Many so-called experts predicted that Rafa could never win a hardcourt slam, even when he was fresh as a daisy. He stopped Fed in his tracks on his march to equal Sampras' record of slam wins. He managed to out think Fed, out maneuver him and out play him. Quite a feat!

Thanks for giving me a good deal to think about! :)

vamosrafa,

I forgot to come back on and let you know that I am a "she" and not a "he"! There's no way you could ever tell, so it's all good! :)

I've been watching Rafa playing tennis since he was a 19 years old. I'm glad I've found a player like Rafa and through all these years, watched him grows up and evolves as a tennis player. To me both Fed and Rafa are extremely talented tennis players. The fact that Rafa, being five years younger than Fed, can still match Fed in terms of court craft, shot selection and tactical play and beats Fed more often than not, speaks volume about Rafa's talent. In my eyes, Rafa is the only player who seriously has a chance to match or even surpass Fed's greatness, which explains why I was really upset for Rafa when injuries ruined his 2009. Well what happened last year made what Rafa achieved this year even more impressive, and those trophies he won this year definitely more precious for both himself and his fans.

@native, lol..dont know why i made the mistake but i knew it pretty well that you are a 'she' not a 'he' lol :D

@chlorostoma , 10/24/10 5:34 AM
---years (his /Fed/ decline started slowly in 2007 before the YOTM - the year of the Mono)---

This Mono is what Fedfans use as an excuse for Fed's losses to Rafa in 2008. But, Fed's back-problem was a convinient excuse already 7 years ago, when he was deemed unfit for military service.
A quotation from a database: <<Like all male Swiss citizens, Federer was subject to compulsory military service in the Swiss Armed Forces. However, in 2003 he was deemed UNFIT due to a LONG-standing BACK problem and was subsequently not required to fulfill his obligation.>>

@chlorostoma , 10/24/10 5:34 AM
--- your /Fed/ speaking 4 languages---

It is not much, comparing to the number of the official languages his native states have. He holds both Swiss (Switzerland) and South African citizenship. Switzerland has 4 official languages: German, French, Italian and Romansh. South Africa has 11 official languages, among them English.

NNY: beg to differ, I think Rafa's Wimbledon win was the truly seminal moment. A bit like when Fed beat Sampras, however, that was a gr8 deal more unexpected, as Rafa had been threatening Roger for a couple of years, whereas Roger almost came out of nowhere. And was, I believe, beaten by our own Tim Henman in the next round.

yep deuce, the wimbie final was for me definitely THE seminal moment, the main reason being that fed was playing at the very top of his game that day, but rafa was just slightly better.

I like your post too chlorostoma but I'm not sure how realistic it could have been for him to keep on improving after the unsurpassed heights he had already reached. I mean, how good can a guy get?! Fed may be a god to some, but his resources aren't infinite.

I agree with Alex. Fed just can't improve indefinitely. What we saw of him during 05/06 might be his best, meaning he might have already reached his full potential then. We can't judge him or his game by simply looking at how well or how badly he played against Rafa. Have we and even the commentators, ever wondered that Rafa is truly a one of his kind player that regardless of how Fed change his game, he simply can't beat Rafa consistently?

Fed did practice against lefties but none of them played like Rafa. It's easy for the commentators to say that Fed should do this or do that against Rafa. However Fed doesn't play that way against all his other oponents and he simply can't play out of comfort zone consistently and having to play well enough in order to beat Rafa. If you can't do that consistently in practice, because no one plays like Rafa, how can you do that in an actual match against Rafa?

To me Fed's game is good enough to handle anyone except Rafa. We see him beating Delpo, Nole and Murray in the past. It's only when age is catching up with him plus these youngsters are reaching their prime now that Fed has difficulties beating them. It's like Sampras at Wimbledon 2002 when he was aging and was beaten by a young 19 year old Fed. I think as great as Sampras and Fed are, they can't prevent age from catching up with them.

luckystar: can't let u get away with that! Andy and Novak beat Rog in his "prime." Don't know about Delboy, as not as interested in him. A win is a win is a win..

luckystar: can't let u get away with that! Andy and Novak beat Rog in his "prime." Don't know about Delboy, as not as interested in him. A win is a win is a win..

deuce , 10/24/10 4:45 PM


deuce, I was going to make that very point.

Ha ha deuce and nadline, I don't need you to remind me, as I did list out those youngsters who had beaten Fed in his prime, I believe on another earlier thread. They are Rafa(starting in 2004); Berdych in 2004 Olympics; Gasquet in 2005 Monte Carlo; Murray in 2006 Cincy; and Nole in 2007 Montreal.

However, they didn't beat Fed as often as Fed had beaten them during his prime (except Rafa of course). It was only starting from 2008 that Murray and Nole started beating Fed more often, though we can't deny that in slams, Fed does have an edge over Murray and Nole but not Rafa.

Actually luckystar, up to 2008, Murray and Federer were 1.1, they did not play each other in 2007; it's true what you say about Djokovic because they were 5.1 to Roger up to 2008, and Djokovic is the only one in the top 4 who has a negative h2h with Roger.

Roger's sickness and injyury. MONO or sick of lung. back or foot.etc. Now his age. and family. kids..

great Roger.

There will be five year Roger in the top. And, wins the championship in Basel. Record of the fourth place. And, the John record 77 titles. it is possible. classy Roger. love you

I am not sure if my comments were misinterpreted or not. I didn't say that I necessarily agreed with the sports analysts and commentators who went after Fed when he lost to Rafa in the 2009 AO. I was just pointing out that there was a lot of hue and cry that Fed needed a coach, needed to do something to beat Rafa. I didn't think it was the lack of a coach that cost Fed the match. Rafa has always been a bad matchup for him. I am not sure that there is much more that Fed can do to best Rafa. Now that he is not in his prime and Rafa is, it will be even harder.

I also don't believe that I said that the 2009 AO was the seminal moment for Rafa. Obviously, it was the 2008 Wimbledon, when Rafa finally got the best of Fed in the final after two previous tries. That match showcased these two at their best. Even though it wasn't the Fed of 2004 -2006, he showed that he could put up a fight, coming back from two sets down. Rafa came out and played some brilliant tennis in those first two sets, especially the second set when he came back from being down 4-1. There was no question that this was a historic moment, when a new champion had arrived and made his mark.

For me personally, the 2009 AO has always been very special, because Rafa had so many reasons to lose. It was a singular achievement for him to battle it out yet again in another five set match and ultimately prevail. I am not going to split hairs here. Rafa has been a thorn in Fed's side, his nemesis. Maybe there really isn't much Fed can do to best Rafa.

thank you for the kind comments on my last post...

I don't think any one thing such as the slice or even ball kicking up to Roger's left shoulder is the main single reason Rafa is a bad matchup to Roger...
Rafa has improved beyound my wildest dreams over the last three years... and between his mental toughness and other reasons he is a bad matchup.

So on the one hand, Alex, you may be right and beating Rafa much more often than Roger has done was perhaps just not in the books,

but on the other hand... I am convinced that Roger COULD have improved his game more the last 4 or 5 years... yes, with great difficulty. This argument I made above, about the stubborness and the arrogance is a RELATIVE argument. Compared to a lot of sports pros nowadays in many sports Federer is not by far the most arrogant (or stubborn I guess). BUT.... he happens to have been so amazing with his strokes and intelligence and movement on court and so unbeatable, especially mentally, that the standard we judge him by is one that would ask for a more successfull third stage of his career post-prime... In addition, his main rival, the one that made him stretch (somewhat but because of stubborness and arrogance not enough) happens to be a Rafa who not only has been approaching Roger's level of tennis but happens to be incredibly non-arrogant and non-stubborn (in terms of wanting to improve and learn) RELATIVE to almost all male tennis pros and many other sports pros... and in this way Rafa's overall achievements, their H2H, and Rafa's public behaviour make a difficult comparison (a difficult mirror if you will) to Roger's not so unusual level of arrogance and stubborness. And to come back to the previous point, Roger's not being as thirsty to improve to compensate more for the relative decline post-prime means each of his not-so-strong weeks stand in stark contrast to his glorious years. His arrogant remarks don't help. And comparisons to Rafa do not either. Overal, then, his post-prime phase is currently tarnishing his previous glory a little to much to my taste... something that would have been avoided had he Rafa's highly unusual level of humility (to learn and to not be arrogant). Again, this is a RELATIVE thing... fundamentally it takes nothing away from his amazing, incredible achievements... it just changes the optics somewhat. At the same time I feel almost ashamed to write all this... for it is incredibly difficult to rise entirely above the way you were raised... Roger's original personality and the way he grew up in his particular circumstances (and that includes such things as being Swiss) meant that he grew up hot-tempered and kind of spoiled amidst his hard work on court... and he has grown up out of that a whole lot... and as I said before most people would become rather arrogant from what happened with his career in his early and mid-twenties... so there he is very human and handling it better than many would have... OK I better stop rambling :-)...

Hello everyone.

Many of you would not be aware but one of the local television stations here in Oz is replaying many of the old Australian Open matches during the wee hours of the morning. My trusty Foxtel is recording these matches for me and I am enjoying watching the classics such as Sampras v Agassi, Lendl v McEnroe and even Edberg v Cash (which was on grass!).

Recently however they played Nadal v Hewitt (AO 2005) and Federer v Safin (AO 2004). What struck me most of all is the very topic that you are discussing here - that even after almost 7 years the 2004 Federer has barely changed while the 2010 Rafa is almost a different player.

Perhaps this brings the ?weak era? argument into play in that Federer had no reason to alter his game because he was dominating every other player on the tour except for Rafa who he probably thought would eventually burn out.

Tim Ruffin also did a piece on this subject:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/497454-roger-rafa-and-t he-weak-era-idea

Some points I don?t agree with but Tim does put forward a very strong case.

Perhaps it is true that there was nothing Federer could have done to combat Rafa, but to not work on improving or varying his own game may prove to have been his undoing. Hiring Annacone now, I think, is too little too late.....

chlorostoma, I don't really agree with you about arrogance is hindering Fed from achieving more or improving his game even more. First, let us identify which area you think Fed can improve more. To me, Fed's volleying skill is the only area that he had slackened since beating Sampras in that 2001 Wimbledon match. Why has it slackened? Well may be because of the slowing down of playing surfaces that rewarded the baseline game more than the S & V game, and so not only Fed but most other old timers like Fed have lost some or most of their volleying skills. The exception may be Llodra. We see in the younger generation, (Rafa's generation), the general lack of volleying skill, and worst still, the lack of skill in dealing with the S & V game. Just take a look at how Llodra beats Berdych at the USO first round this year; and how Llodra had beaten Simon almost every time they met; and how Tsonga had to go to tie-breaks most of the time in order to beat Llodra. To me, Fed's so called 'deterioration' in his volleying skill is rather circumstantial more than his own doing. Now that almost everyone can be good at the baseline, we see even Rafa has picked up on his volleying skills by playing more doubles matches, and top players like Rafa, Nole and Murray are all honing their volleying skills and incorporating them into their games. Fed has to do the same in order to keep ahead or even just to keep up with them. We see after Fed has teamed up with Annacone, he tries to move up to the net as much as possible and looking to improve his volleying too. Of course the general lack of practice has cost him some matches, we sometimes see Fed approaching the net at the wrong time and get passed by Murray or Nole.

Other than volleying skill, I really think that every part of Fed's game has reached its optimum - his serve, his forehand, his backhand, his slices, his court positioning, his shot selection, his footwork. Fed's recent shanking was due mainly to his timing the ball not as well as before, and his first serve percentage wasn't as good as before due mainly to his back problem, may be age and the week in week out grinding of the tour throughout his long career has finally taken its toll on Fed, though I must say his footwork is still excellent and one of the best out there.

cal 23, you have to take into consideration that in 2004/2005, Rafa was just a teenager and of course his improvements may be more prominent than Fed's. Do remember that Rafa during one of his CNN interviews did mentioned that Fed had inspired Rafa to improve as even when Fed was no.1 then, he kept improving his game; so in order for Rafa to catch up with Fed, Rafa had to improve. Its unfair for us to say that Fed didn't want to improve because of whatever reasons. We don't play against Fed but Rafa does and does so many times, surely Rafa won't lie about Fed. My conclusion is Fed has reached his peak and his full potential during his prime, given the circumstances there and then. His volleying skill may not be as good as before, ie, prior to 2003/2004 but if he continues to practice and pick up from where he left off, he may once again be as good a volleyer as he was prior to 2003/2004.

Luckystar, never did I say that Roger did not want to improve, I just think that when you are at the top your goal is to maintain that position. Therefore my comment was that Roger "had no reason to alter his game", it was working just fine. Also, I think that Roger's game improved naturally when he matured as a tennis player.

I may be wrong but I can't see anywhere in Roger's history where there is a purposeful change in a ground stroke or a deliberate variation to a serve to counter another player's game.

Roger is an extremely gifted tennis player there's no doubt about that but if there had been someone he aspired to I believe his game would have improved even more.

Brilliant discussion, lots of analysis without any nastiness! GR8.
When I watched Fed v Berdych at Wimbledon, I couldn't believe Fed's return of serve. Time after time it was a feeble plop in the middle of the court back to Berdych, nor did he change his position on return of serve. Given that Fed probably wants to win Wimbledon above all others, I could not understand why someone as experienced as he did not attempt something different. Was that down to stubborness of the kind "I'm Roger Federer, Berdych can't possibly beat me." I was/am still baffled.

OK cal, I take your point. Seriously, I think there is nothing much Fed could improve on except for his volleying skill. He did have good variation of serves. According to some commentators, Fed's serve motion is excellent and that regardless of placement or any variation, his serve motion is practically the same, making it difficult for opponents to read his serve. Concerning ground stroke change, there's also nothing much he can do as his is already the best, unless you are talking about changing his grip. I don't think that will help either, as I've mentioned, his game is really good enough for 95% of the players, why take risk now when the reward isn't guaranteed.

There is practically only one player (Rafa) who can consistently beat him on three surfaces; and one who consistently beats him on hard court but over best of three sets matches(Murray). Other than that, there are another two youngsters who can beat him now in the hard court slams (Nole & Delpo). Of course there is Berdych and there is Sod, but they only started beating him in slams this year. Just how much can Fed improve to counter all these youngsters, now that he is already 29 and they are reaching or have already reached their prime?

One consolation from the recent results, at least Fed still can beat Sod, Berdych and Nole in Masters events. Maybe that will give him more confidence the next time he meets them in slams.

cal, what make you think that Fed does not have anyone he aspired to be like? I thought he named Sampras and also Laver as someone he looked up to? I read somewhere that Fed in his earlier days, liked to watch videos about other great player's matches, esp Sampras', not only to learn how to play like them, but to think of ways to counter them and beat them. That may explain why it took Fed five years in the tour before he started to win his first slam, and from then, there's no turning back and he kept winning slams every year. That five years were spent learning all the tactical plays, perfecting his own ball striking skills and most importantly, putting all the acts together successfully, for him to start winning slams.

deuce, we all start off this discussion with the assumption that Fed is arrogant. So, when he didn't adjust his position to return his serves (against Berdych), we think Fed was arrogant and didn't want to change and he thought that he would still beat Berdych in the end because he was the better grass court player. However, can we give Fed the benefit of doubt, and accept it that Fed was hampered by some thigh or back problem and his movement might be compromised? Based on Fed's experience, he would know exactly what to do if his own ROS sucked; he didn't win all his slams by not wanting to adjust his position in the court when it was necessary to do so! For all we know, Fed may be the one who actually knows exactly where his game stands now, against all his major rivals/opponents. The fact that he finally wants a coach (first it was Cahill, now he finally gets Annacone), shows us that Fed knows that there are some problems in his game. Maybe Fed knows deep down, when his game is functioning at 100%, he really can beat anyone, except Rafa. Its a matter of finding back his game at 100%, if that is still possible for him to do so.

I for one believes that only Rafa can match Fed when both are at 100%. Rafa has just reached his prime and is still improving. To me, Rafa still has much room for improvement and that's the scary part. I won't be surprised that when Rafa reaches his peak, ie his full potential, his ball striking abilities can match that of Fed's in his prime (because I strongly believe Rafa is as talented as Fed, just that they started off differently, Fed concentrating on his ball striking skills while Rafa on strategic play). Rafa has the added advantage of a better strategic mind, due to what he was taught from young by Uncle Toni. Rafa also has a strong mindset and steely focus; he may be expressive outwardly but he has his own inner serenity. Both Fed and Rafa shared the same killer instinct that most great players should have, but when it comes to crunch time, live and death situation in a match, Rafa is the one who wins, hands down. Just watch their Rome 2006 final match again, when Fed has match points against Rafa, Fed played too conservatively, he was afraid to lose this advantage and preferred to be careful, and hoped that Rafa made mistakes. Rafa on the other hand, took his chances, just like his Wimbledon match against Murray this year, not forgetting also Rafa's match against Nalby at IW 2009, where Rafa played those match points he faced well enough to save all of them.

In conclusion, I think Fed has already reached his best in 2006, what he is trying to do now is to pick up on areas where he has slackened, and coupled that with some strategic changes to his game, and hopefully that would be enough for him to beat his opponents and win some more slams.

Luckystar, thank you for your comments, I do enjoy getting someone else's perspective on this subject.

I agree, there is not much that Fed could have improved on but you actually make my point when you say "his game is really good enough for 95% of the players, why take risk now when the reward isn't guaranteed". I think this has been his problem all along, although not always by his own making.

We agree that Rafa is the only player who has consistently troubled Fed. Therefore, if his natural game has been good enough to take him to number 1 and keep him there for an extraordinary amount of time why would he risk losing that ranking? Unfortunately, the fact that Fed is significantly older than Rafa, Nole, Murray, etc. has not done him any favours. I don't believe he has been forced to make significant changes to his game like Rafa has. Fed still plays almost the same way against every player because it has worked so well in the past, whereas Rafa has learned that he needs a certain game plan against different players. I also don't believe that Fed has ever had the same mental strength that Rafa possesses simply because it hasn't been necessary.

Looking up to someone and being inspired by them is very different to pushing yourself to be better than them. For a long time there was no one in front of Fed to drive him to be a better player. I liken it to running on the track, if you have no one to chase, how do you know how hard to push yourself?

Unfortunately, when Fed was at his peak (2006/2007) there was not the quality of players around him that there are now, apart from Rafa. Had the 2009/2010 versions of Murray, Nole, Delpo, etc. been with him then, I believe we would have seen a mentally stronger Fed who may have even developed different aspects to his game.

Also, I don?t think I would call it arrogance when Fed doesn?t change his game plan on court etc, again I just don?t think he has ever needed to develop the mental skills to do it because his natural game produced such good results.

Although certainly not out of the question, I believe it more unlikely than not that Fed will win another major. Time is not on his side and age is catching up with him. I hope I?m wrong though because I would love to see another Rafa/Federer final.

Yes cal, basically we agree on most points we discussed. Maybe Fed's game didn't change much because 1) he need not do so 2) he can't change for the better as he has already reached his optimum. Fed has to get out of his comfort zone and played consistently like that to have a chance to beat Rafa, and I'm not sure whether that can be considered an improvement to his game. Maybe we are talking about strategy or tactics here instead of pure techniques. Where that is concerned, I think yes Fed can improve, which is why he has engaged Annacone's help. To me, Fed has to change his strategies in order to keep up with the youngsters, as they more or less have gotten used to Fed's game.

I do agree that Fed lacked a group of players like Murray, Nole and Delpo to push him when he was in his TMF days. He was well ahead of his peers, and those who really can challenge him (Safin and Nalby) didn't perform up to expectations. I think Rafa does not have such luxury, as I think Nole, Murray and Delpo all habour the ambition of becoming the no.1 player in the world. That may work well for Rafa, in terms of pushing him to fully realize his potential in order to stay ahead of the pack.

With Annacone's help on strategy and game plan, and Fed's work on his fitness and the technical parts of his game, for example his volleying, yes, Fed may be able to win some more slams. That may be bad news for Nole, Murray, Delpo and the rest, though I think Rafa still will be able to get the better of Fed if they meet.

There are two aspects to Roger that can be called arrogance.

One is what he says in interviews about matches he has lost (especially about other players), about how amazed he is at his own accomplishments, and so on. We had a blog here that ran into hundreds of comments debating this. Many commentators outside of TT who don't mind to be politically incorrect have made similar observations.

The other side of it is how much he did or did not work to keep improving his game once he reached the beginning / middle of his prime. Yes, it is very true that the competition in front of him, except for Rafa, did not *in itself* provide much motivation for continued efforts at improvement. And many people believed that Rafa would not be a consistent threat on grass and hardcourt... brushing off his early victories against Roger on hardcourt... and that Rafa's knees would end his career by 2007 or so.

But...

... and here he's outlook is so different from the one Rafa grew up with: Rafa has said a number of times, including before and after this last US Open, that in order to remain at number 1 he will have to forever keep improving... and that the day he no longer has the deep feeling (my words) to improve he will retire. Contrast this with the consistent theme in Roger's interviews: "I was unlucky", "I didn't take my chances", "This is a match I would normally win", "You can't win them all", etc... (paraphrasing)...

... I have been getting the same impression from Roger for years now. That he has fully bought into the way the world out there has been portraying him, especially those for whom the tennis circuit is their income: journalists, advertisers, championship venues... and also by those fans who feel better about themselves through a degree of identification with TMF... a potrayal rooted in reality but exagerating Roger's perfection into one of an archetype, a mythical hero, a semi-deity... of the one player on the circuit today or maybe of any day that is not ... human.

In this these two men seem to have grown two vastly different ways to be winners.

One is the utter belief that you can win, that you will win, one based on some (often appropriate) self-delusion, a la Del Potro claiming (if he believes it) that he had his chances at number one when 2010 started.

The other is the attitude that says that you are vulnerable to lose in any match but you practice as intelligently (ie learning all the time) and as hard as you can and then you give it your all on the court, no matter how the match is progressing ... then no matter what happens in a given match you have done your best and given yourself the best chances to win and you can leave the court knowing you've done just that.

Neither of these is "the one", "the only" right approach. I just think that Roger could have used more of the latter than the former. Perhaps that's asking too much of someone who's been deified at such a young age.

I do think there was (is) room for improvement in Roger's strokes, and certainly to his tactics.

And, equally important, there was a lot of room for improvement in his mental attitude. Some time ago there was a brief discussion here where Cheryl Murray wrote that Roger's game is based very much on timing. I then suggested that the days his timing is off quite often might have a lot to do with his unconscious (subconscious, if you prefer)... quite often, too often, he has not seemed deeply motivated to fight if things were not going his way.

Agree with what you said, chlorostoma, that 'neither of these is "the only" right approach'. Either approach may work for or work against you, its a matter of striking the right balance. Rafa once said that Toni always makes him respect his opponents, sometimes it worked against Rafa, in that his confidence may be affected when he faces his opponents. In the same way, Fed's 'arrogance' may work for him at times in that it gives him self belief when facing his opponents.

I'm not sure about whether Fed can improve on his mental attiude, now that he is no longer 'young' and after already having so much success. Ironically, his so much success may have led to his mental 'shortcomings' as most of the time, he won relatively easily and was spared the grinding.

I ever asked the question whether one was born with mental toughness, based on one's character; or was it a matter of training, especially from young. For Rafa's case, I believe he was born with a competitive spirit, one that always wanted to win (there are many articles about this) and Uncle Toni had seen that in Rafa and might have built on it and trained him from young to be mentally tough. If one was not born with such fighting spirit as Rafa, could he still be trained to be mentally tough?

I'm very interested to find out about Delpo, as Delpo displayed similar mental toughness, though may not be as strong as Rafa. Delpo does everything according to his own timing, not to be rushed; does this character of his have any bearings on his mental toughness? Or was he also trained from young to be mentally tough?

agreed, luckystar,
Roger's personality to some extent, and the circumstances to a perhaps larger extent created this situation. And that includes fighting with everything you've got in the matches that are really not going your day, or on a day when you are off...

I think that just about any player in the top 100 was born with a potential to be a fighter.. or they could not get this far... and yes, some more than others, and probably Rafa more than most... BUT... it is becoming increasingly clear in recent research that genetics only predicts so far a variety of potentials... everything that happens in your life (the development) shapes greatly where you end up. E.g. Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers reports that the vast majority of professional hockey players were born in the first two or three months of the year... in every country where early childhood and later recruiting through the levels of hockey playing is done based on calendar year. At the ages of 6, 7, and 8 the extra months those kids born in January and Februray have over those born in November and December make all the difference, and after selection the chosen once get all the advantages of training etc.

What I mean is that on the one hand the role of genetics is HUGE, on the other hand what all happens in a lifetime is also HUGE, probably even more HUGE. Rafa was raised in a family where one uncle was a former soccer hero and built like a tank, and another uncle saw to it he grew up match-tough through the nature of everything they did in training. In an interview in New York Rafa was asked about his mental toughness and he suggested it was all down to the training during his childhood and teenage years. (Elesewhere in the past we heard about Tony training Rafa with bad balls sometimes, on bad surfaces sometimes, and generally not accepting any excuses etc.) That is perhaps overstating it, but perhaps not nearly by as much as some might think.

Roger, on the other hand, used to throw fairly major tantrums into his late late teenage years and was thrown off court a number of times. He more or less outgrew this, i.e. he keeps it under control, but he definitely grew up with a vastly different attitude. I'm not dissing it: his attitude of temper inside and of taking everything he can is the other succesful strategy. In the balance of 900 matches on the professional circuit Roger has only rarely given in to breaking a racket or having strong arguments with the umpire.

chlorostoma, thanks for your response. Interesting info about the hockey players. I believe both genetics and environmental influences, eg one's upbringing, do play a part in moulding a person's character. I believe in Rafa's case, his competitive spirit may make it easier for Uncle Toni to train him in his mental strength.

I'm interested to find out more about Delpo, as I seldom read about him. Being a Rafa fan, its only natural that I concentrate more on Rafa than anybody else.

Watching Roger one often has the feeling that inside the suave man there is a spoilt brat still trying to get out. You can sometimes see him wrestling with this and very occasionally losing the battle. When this does happen it has far more of a shock value than when other players indulge in far worse behaviour.

ed,
Right on the money!

It's rather sweet how the groupies are creeping back on the other thread to celebrate ;-)

groupies: appropriate word

Yes, one in particular has managed to resurface! I guess it's to be expected now that Fed has managed to win a tournament again. When it's Rafa winning everything, then they seem to run for cover.

It's rather sweet how the groupies are creeping back on the other thread to celebrate ;-)

ed251137 , 10/25/10 8:09 PM


ed, do you mean the FedUps? That's a great word you invented - FedUps. Roger wins a 250 title, and they are back, singing his praises like he's just won the Olympic Singles Gold. lol

nadline , 10/25/10 11:16 PM: that's exactly to whom I was referring. As NNY points out, they mysteriously disappear as soon as the object of their desire is seen to be human and loses a few matches and the spotlight is on Rafa - hence my epithet for this particular group of fans.

ed,

I love that nickname - FedUps it is! I see you got some grief on the other blog where our dear departed one has resurfaced right on cue. However, it tells you something when Fed winning a 250 tournament brings out so much excitement! And yes, the answer is that this person does NOT do irony or even understand the concept! :)

Rafafans! There is another interesting article published in "Bleacher Report". It's about Federer's "sore loser" remarks related to Rafa's achievements.

Some quotes: <<Roger Federer Must Stop His Ungracious Remarks Before Rafa Nadal Does a Voltaire.
Roger Federer's "sore loser" remarks as well as his left handed compliments to Nadal describing him as a great claycourter have been well documented and decried. Now we have his latest innuendoes about slowing down of surfaces. /---/
Before the US Open, Federer remarked that the fast courts at Flushing Meadows might prove to be a challenge for Rafa. /---/ After Nadal won, the refrain now is that all the surfaces have been slowed down. At Stockholm recently he claimed that the Grand Slam was achievable because all the surfaces have been slowed down. /---/
Are the surfaces being continuously slowed down? Wimbledon had changed to rye grass in 2001 resulting in some slowing down. But there is no record of any of the Grand Slam surfaces being slowed down after 2003. So what is Roger talking about? Clearly, he is trying to discount Nadal's achievements on the faster surfaces. /---/
Sooner or later, the moment will come when Nadal will do a Voltaire. If you don't know what I am talking about, let me tell you the story of the famous Voltaire repartee.
Voltaire was talking to a visitor who mentioned having met Albrecht von Haller, a Swiss (ah, the Swiss connection!) poet and Physiologist. Voltaire immediately expressed a lot of praise for Haller describing him as a great poet, a man of great knowledge etc. The visitor told Voltaire that his praise was to be commended all the more as Haller always spoke disparagingly of Voltaire and his works.
Then Voltaire made his famous remark, " Perhaps we are BOTH MISTAKEN ! " >>

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/502984-roger-federer-must-stop-his-ungracious-remarks-before-rafa-nadal-does-a-voltaire

I don't care what Fed said, as long as Rafa can win everything under the sun. Rafa had won USO defeating one of the best hard court player around. He had also won Tokyo Open, one of the fastest hard court around. I'm looking forward to Rafa winning Paris Masters, WTF and then Rotterdam(all indoor hard court and Rotterdam being one of the fastest indoor hard court) and then win Cincy. The best thing to happen is for Rafa to win Miami and Shanghai too so that he'll complete his Masters collection, and of course to win AO against next year and defends all his slam wins of this year to complete the calendar slam; that way he can shut the mouth of Mr Fed.

Mr Fed seemed to forget he also won his career slam with the surfaces all being slowed down, what applied to Rafa also applied to Fed. Well maybe Fed is getting ready all these discreditings in case Rafa wins the calendar slam next year.

Augustina, thanks for the link, and luckystar, I second everything you've said above luckystar , 10/27/10 11:36 AM.

As I have never thought Federer was gracious, I am not at all surprised with any of his bitter attacks on Rafa, no doubt he is building up his portfolio to win the sportsmanship award for 2010, because the ATP will nominate him with other none starters to ensure that he wins it again.

What a bitter twisted man Federer is. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he has a Rafa doll that he sticks pins into every day. The sooner commentators stop presenting him as a talented ambassador of the sport the better, he is nothing of the sort, just a self centered mediocre player who has been lucky in a weak era.

How did they slow the courts down, did they dig them up and re-lay them with slower material before the USO started? Before the USO Federer was smugly talking about how Rafa would have to win the USO to prove this that and the other, because the USO courts were the fastest, so when did they slow the court up, was it after Federer was beaten by Djokovic in the SF, or was it slowed down before the the tournament started, or did they slow it down just before Rafa came on court.

Federer needs to prove himself by winning RG more than once and when Rafa is not injured. I'm so sorry that Rafa couldn't defend his Wimbledon last year, he would have had his 6th GS win over Roger.

Does anyone remember Federer saying you don't have to be a good tennis player to win on clay, that you don't have to be able to serve, you just have to run a lot and chase every ball down? That's another example of putting Rafa down.

Here is another of his conceited comments:

Roger, after the 2005 Wimbledon championships: ?It just started to pour out, all the talent I had. I finally could unlock all my potential. It was unbelievable the feeling I got after it. I got so confident, and with confidence you play better and when you play better you get more results and the whole thing was like this snowball effect.?

http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/04/09/roger-federer-spi rit-champion-champion/

I too agree with everything you said, luckystar, in your most recent post here.
I don't think Rafa will be able to win all of those 'missing' tournies over the next 12 months but he has a great chance to win several. It would not be surprising if he does win them all eventually... there aren't many left. He's said that winning the WTF is his next major goal. Injuries notwithstanding I don't see what will prevent him for doing that if not this year then the next.

Nadline, I agree with most things you write. I have to disagree about Federer being a mediocre player who got lucky with a weaker era in top of the men's tennis. Arguably it was weaker overall around the time he had all his skills honed and had had enough experience on the circuit to start winning big a lot (2003 or so).

But I would never call Federer a mediocre player. He is a phenomenal player in just about every respect.

When it comes to his remarks about himself and other players, we agree. On the surface he says positive things about others but 50% of the time they are thinly disguised backhanded compliments.

And as for speaking about himself... he is very average there in how he's coped with the extreme level of success, fame, riches and adulation that he has enjoyed at least since 2003 or so: he's no better than many other very successful and famous (and rich) individuals be they in sports, entertainment etc... i.e. pretty badly. And yes, 'rich' is part of this in a world where many of our cultures, media and people's personal beliefs would suggest that the richer you are the more right, better a person, intelligent, objective and worthy of copying you are.

Again, the one side of this is that you need a huge amount of self-belief to sustain your competitiveness... but there are other ways to do so... Rafa's being one example. As for us non-groupies, it is tiring and insulting to our intelligence to hear his self-congratulations endlessly.

And it is also counterproductive to Roger himself: I really believe that some of his delusions re himself, Rafa and other players, i.e. his lack of humility in the best sense of the word, has and is hurting his performance... and has for several years now but increasingly so.

I do believe that Federer has had times when he was elated because his talent really clicked and thus his abilities on court were superlative. And that is, truly, a beautiful thing. What is not is the way he views and talks about it. As it happens I just got a copy of "Zen in the Art of Archery" from the library yesterday and finished reading this very short but deeply insightful book written about 60 years ago by a German philosophy professor who while working in Japan got instruction in Zen archery from a true master, for 6 years. The try to boil it down: the entire training was aimed at getting to a point where the ego completely quiets down and takes a seat and let the unconscious perform the entire ceremony from drawing the bow to holding it extended at the point of highest tension to the moment of release that is completly not planned or controlled by the conscious mind. "It" does it all, not the "I". In the West we know precious little in how to train people to regularly enter deeply into this kind of 'zone'. And you won't get there too often and perhaps never in a deep way with your ego.

chlorostoma, I'm so angry about the constant put downs of Rafa by Federer, saying clay court tennis is just chasing balls, and you don't even have to be able to serve; he deserves a bit of his own medicine. Frankly, I have never seen Federer as a great player, he is an instincttive player, and when he is not challenged he looks good.

Isn't it ironical that Fed mentioned that one's success during the clay season was measured by how well one performed at the FO and not at the clay masters, after Rafa had set a new milestone by winning all three clay masters, and then Fed went on to lose to Sod at the QF of the FO? Fed was basically slapping himself there; I laughed after seeing how silly he was by saying things like that just to discredit what Rafa had achieved on clay this year; I sensed a hint of jealousy by Fed there.

Federer is jealous of Rafa, period.

Everytime he talks someone down, it comes back to bite him, like what luckystar has referred above that only winning RG would determine success in the clay season, not winning all the Masters titles on clay, and Rafa went on to RG as well, and Roger dodn't even make the final. He also said that unfortunately for Djokovic, he always has to go past him to win the USO, and Djoko promptly beat him in the SF, then he said Rafa's ability on h/c would only be confirmed if he won the USO, and Rafa went on to win it, but now he tells us the court was slowed up.

I wish someone would do a book of all Federer's bad taste pronouncements, I would definitely buy one. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Rafa hears these absolute sour grape comments coming from Federer. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to get through to the other players, and they keep voting for him for the sportsmanship award.

Yep, isn't it ironical again that one sour grape and sore loser fella always get voted and won the sportsmanship award? And we have people criticizing Rafa of gamesmanship! Who is the one who always plays mind games, and always talk big about himself and tries to diminish others achievements? I'm so glad that both Rafa and Nole had taught Fed some lessons at the FO and the USO respectively.

sick nada fan. always annoying

nadal's excuse.

"I didn?t play? well. little bit more? tired than usual. physically and mentally. nadal's excuse.

all players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against? by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoyingness of movement when win. and the trophy is always bitten like the infant.? muscular power. always shout. etc

I not like nadal

I didn't play well. little bit more tired than usual. physically and mentally. nadal's excuse.

all players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoyingness of movement when win. and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout. etc.

Roger win the champion in Stockholm. Roger said. "which becomes the last victory for me, not understood, a sincerely glad"

poor Roger. you are true class. love you Roger

@nadline , 10/27/10 2:47 PM
---Does anyone remember Federer saying you don't have to be a good tennis player to win on clay, that you don't have to be able to serve, you just have to run a lot and chase every ball down? That's another example of putting Rafa down.---


Yes, I remember this well. He said it before French Open this year. The article/interview <<Federer: "On clay you don't need a volley or a serve. It's too easy" >> was published in The Independent on 22 May 2010.
I must say, Federer gave a very controversal interview.
Fed says in the interview that he is NOT trying to take anything away from Rafa and he doesn't want to say it's too simple to play on clay. But, he still SAYS that it's sometimes too easy.
"On clay you don't need to have a volley," Federer says. "You almost don't need to have a serve. All you need to have is legs, an incredible forehand and backhand and to run things down. /---/ On a hard court you can lure a guy in and do many more things. You almost have to have more feel. On clay, I don't want to say it's too simple, that you just have to keep the ball in court and wait for a mistake, but sometimes it's too easy." /---/
Then Fed says that his problem is not clay, it's Rafa.
Then Fed says that clay has not been easy for him: "The reason why clay has not been so easy for me is that on the other surfaces I can play my game without thinking"
Then Fed admits that it has taken him time to find the best way to play on clay: "I had to learn how to control my aggression, because I love to finish points quickly /---/ On clay it's not that easy /---/ The more I played on clay the more I started to understand the game on clay, even though I had great potential. If you play the wrong game on clay and play well, you can still lose. You have to play smart as well. It's something I had to get really used to, especially when I was coming up against the best player like Rafa."

So, playing on clay is too easy&not easy for Federer. Fed's main problem is Rafa, because Fed must think when playing against Rafa, but Fed is used to play without thinking.
Fed is praising Rafa, but still I got feeling that he is trying to diminish Rafa's achievments.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/federer-on-cla y-you-dont-need-a-volley-or-a-serve-its-too-easy-1979825.html

Roger doing for over long time. Charity activity of Roger.
As a Support to Africa. As a Ambassador of UNICEF. As a idea of hit for the haiti. etc. Roger always a role model of the activity.

voted by ATP players. Roger Federer. Record. sixth consecutive times.

nadal's excuse.


I didn't play well. little bit more tired than usual. physically and mentally. nadal's excuse.

all players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoyingness of movement when win. and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout. etc.

I not like nadal

Federer and Nadal: Fit of Laughter During Shooting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94xyOpETYYs

funny. great guys

Roger win the champion in Stockholm. Roger said. "which becomes the last victory for me, not understood, a sincerely glad" poor Roger

Roger doing for over long time. Charity activity of Roger.
As a Support to Africa. As a Ambassador of UNICEF. As a idea of hit for the haiti. etc. Roger always a role model of the activity. And, voted by ATP players. Roger Federer. Record. sixth consecutive times. true classy Roger

@tennisnba , 10/27/10 7:56 PM

Fed's excuse after his loss to Berdych.
Roger Federer Wimbledon Interview June 30th 2010:
<< ROGER FEDERER: /---/ You know, I am struggling with a little bit of a BACK and a LEG issue. That just doesn't quite allow me to play the way I would like to play./---/

Q. When did you first start feeling the problems?

ROGER FEDERER: Well, the leg came in the finals of Halle. That kind of never really quite got away from me. Came back a little bit after the first-round match, and then went away again and just kept creeping back sometimes during the matches.

The back's been feeling stiff the last five days, six days really badly. Also in the finals of Halle. It's just something that's been lingering on the grass. It's normal that the back tends to get stiff, you know, in the grass court season because you have to, uhm, go for many more lower shots. I've had that for MANY YEARS /---/ >>

nadal's excuse.


I didn't play well. little bit more tired than usual. physically and mentally. nadal's excuse.

all players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoyingness of movement when win. and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout. etc.

I not like nadal. and arrogance nadal fan

Roger win the champion in Stockholm. Roger said.

"which becomes the last victory for me, not understood, a sincerely glad" poor Roger

Roger doing for over long time. Charity activity of Roger.
As a Support to Africa. As a Ambassador of UNICEF. As a idea of hit for the haiti. etc. Roger always a role model of the activity.

FACT.
voted by ATP players. Roger Federer. Record. sixth consecutive times. true classy Roger

Can tennisnba pls stop posting the same thing more than once? We get what you said, don't have to keep posting exactly the same thing, it doesn't make it more 'true'. Anyway like what I said about the irony of Fed winning the sportsmanship award and tennisnba doesn't understand the irony. Don't talk about charity work as if Fed is the only one doing it, others like Rafa, Roddick, Agassi are doing it too? Spitting on the clay court, tennisnba pls go and watch some of Fed's matches on clay, he too spit on court, just less often that's all.

Anyway all these doesn't change the fact that Fed is a sore loser. The irony is Fed thought that clay court tennis is relatively easier to play as you do not need volleying skills, just lots of running and keeping the ball in play and yet such simple things Fed couldn't do them well that he lost to Montanes in Estoril, Gulbis in Rome and Sod in the FO. Of course he losing to Rafa on clay was nothing new, and so he lost in Madrid.

Federer one of the best in male tennis history. No doubt.

Federer often sore loser. Very often disgraceful in comments on other players.

What great contrast.

lol. When Roger is defeated at Robin, Montanes, and Murray in shanhgi etc

Did Roger say anything? Sickness of Roger. or About a bad schedule of the tournament side. etc. He got long slump.

this is Roger's thread.

Roger made the record record again. It is a commonsense action to praise. Is the Roger's anti activity something to live for? lol

Roger is most respected by the ATP players.

voted by ATP players. Roger Federer. Record sixth consecutive times.

It is not admitted. Pitiful. lol


Then, why is nadal never chosen? Please write the reason.


However, nadal will be chosen for the first time next time. Because this year of Roger's slump. too poor year of Roger's.

why is nadal never chosen. I think

players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoying move in play. annoyingness of movement when win.

and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout play

insightful nba really

@tennisnba , 10/27/10 10:10 PM
---When Roger is defeated...Murray in shanhgi etc. Did Roger say anything?---

At the Shanghai Masters, Fed blaimed his loss on a linesperson.
<<Federer ANGRY with call after defeat.
Andy Murray romped to a 6-3 6-2 win over Switzerland's Roger Federer to claim the Shanghai Masters title but Federer was unhappy with linesperson mistake.
Federer was annoyed that the umpire had over-ruled a call in his favour on a breakpoint in the second set, saying the decision possibly cost him the match. "It was a classic bad mistake by the linesperson. In the end it's what maybe cost me the match," the Swiss said.
Federer appeared to run out of steam in the second set as Murray repeatedly sent the 29-year-old scurrying from side to side with an array of pinpoint cross-court winners.
The Swiss was still smarting about the overturned line call after the match. "It happens all the time. You hope it doesn't happen in the finals against a great player like Andy on a breakpoint," he said. >> [Reuters, 17 Oct 2010]

lol. it is an interview of Roger, everything can be seen here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkidaGVnyuE The smile can be seen by relaxing very much. Roger

Yeah, Fed always blame something when he lost. When he lost to Montanes in Estoril, that famous quote of his came out - that you do not need volleying skills to win on clay, that you can do lots of running to retrieve balls and keep them in play and forced errors upon your opponents to win on clay. So, his opponents relied on lots of running? So Fed himself couldn't run? I thought his footwork and his speed is among the best? And so if his opponents can retrieve so many balls, Fed would lose? What kind of a 'great champion' is he?

When he lost to Sod at the FO, he blame it on the weather change and the heavier conditions after the rain favoring Sod's style of play. While that might be true, but was that the reason he lost? I think he lost because of his own fault, ie he lost his concentration in the second set and allowed Sod to win the set. Had he won the second set, even later on when he lost the fourth set after the rain, most likely the match would be postponed to the next day due to darkness. I thought that Fed would win the fifth set had it been played on the following day.

Of course he blamed his loss to Berdych at the Wimbledon on his injuries. While some complained that Rafa always gave injury excuses for his losses, Fed was not much better.

To me, his greatest excuse was his back problem, when during the WTF last year in one of his many interviews, he mentioned that his many losses to Murray was due to him having some physical issues (his back issue) and so he chalked up some consecutive losses to Murray during the period after the 2008 USO till IW 2009. Yet when Rafa was back from his knee injuries in 2009 and started to lose to so many top ten players, he was not allowed to give his knee injury problem as his reason for the losses and so the talk of Delpo owning Rafa started..

So, why complain about Rafa giving excuses when he lost while Fed is also doing the same? Both of them hate to lose. If they lost, they'll try to find for themselves the reason they lost and maybe from there learn not to make the same mistakes again. The difference is that while Rafa may give the reason why he lost, he also give credit where credit is due, ie that his opponents played well to win. Fed on the other hand, would say something like, when he is back to his best, he can deal with the big hitters and beat them; whether he beats or lose to Murray, the match was determined by his racket and not by Murray. Again, he may be right but that shows the ungracious side of him. See the difference there?

players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoying move in play. annoyingness of movement when win.

and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout play


hey.tennisnba

players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoying move in play. annoyingness of movement when win.

and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout play

tennisnba

I superadd. Do you know? Nadal said nigger-, To the black man. a racist. hypocrite. I never admit Nadal. And, arrogant Nadal's fan is really hated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFIVbyKIGQw

What is it with all the broken english? tennisnba??? nadaloverestimation???

What's the use of posting when nobody understands you? You need help??

The purpose of these ridiculous posts is to spam all the blogs and disrupt the discussion. How can you have a back and forth with someone who is obviously speaking in such broken english deliberately? It's not meant to be taken as a serious attempt at intelligent discussion. It's just the usual suspects, trying a different method of getting their point across, praising Fed to the heavens and finding a new way to attack Rafa and his fans.

Whatever spam they post, it still can't deny the fact that Fed is ungracious in defeats. No point for them to spam the threads as nobody would want to read them even if they do it ten times or hundred times. When we see their names, we just skip their posts, simple as that. No need to be bothered with them as they can't get into any decent discussions.

luckystar,

You are the one who asked the question. Therefore, I followed up with my take on what is the motivation and purpose behind these absurd posts.

Lucky:"What is it with all the broken english? tennisnba??? nadaloverestimation???

"What's the use of posting when nobody understands you? You need help??"
----------------------
I hate to get into the middle of this topic of spamming, etc., but I think by now most of you have figured out the identity of who is doing the spamming, under the guise of using broken English. I had made mention of the broken English a while back, and I see it's gotten worse. A word to the unwise, regardless of how you try to cover up your writing style, there are several words and your construction of the pertinent topic matter that even your mish-mash can't disguise.

This same person has written a very lengthy list of what they perceive to be, Nadal's numerous imperfections, e.g., the puking of saliva on the court, et al., but on this site, has broken up that list into several posts. I'm sure if someone were to take the several posts here and put it all together in one list, and do a comparison check, you'd see it's the one and same person. tut tut, and sheesh. For example, the foregoing was included in the lengthy list I mentioned above that she posted on another site:

"why is nadal never chosen. I think

"players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

"formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoying move in play. annoyingness of movement when win. "

You are all correct in your assumptions, but it's really sad that this person is so vile and wicked to stoop to such so low depths, as in being down in the mire, to post under a fake moniker (Oh, I forget she doesn't know the meaning of moniker LOL), because she's a coward and doesn't have the guts to do so under her true post name. I mentioned previously that it couldn't be her using the tennisnba name, as she's not American, but I was wrong. I forgot how much of a google queen she really is.

I know I'm public enemy No. 1, and she'll probably jump all over me for commenting on her behaviour, as she thinks everyone is crazy and she's the only sane one around. BTW, for those who don't know, she's not hearing impaired, she only uses this as a sham to gain sympathy. She, and some of her other friends have a field day on facebook discussing her/their common enemies. Facebook is the new gossip forum for them to congregate, vent and throw darts at their perceived enemies, and quite a group they make!

tennisnba and all like her know their fading idol can't beat Rafa on court so they try to beat him with words.............well, sticks and stones may break his back, but words will never hurt him.

VAMOS RAFA!

Yes, it appears that the tennisnba screen name was used to try to throw us off in our attempts to "out" this person. The attacks are all too familiar to those of us who have been on this forum for a while. Also, notice that when this person is posting under her usual screen name, the posts from tennisnba disappear and only come back when she disappears. Some of us have already picked up on that. The attacks are the same ones she has always made in the past, with this pathetic attempt to disguise them via the broken english. The message is still the same, the hatred for Rafa and his fans is still very evident.

So the most obsessed Fed fan of them all, has found a new way to clutter up this site with her nonsensical rants. Apparently, there is also a conscious awareness that, as long as no profane or abusive language is used, these repetitive and spamming posts will not be deleted.

Moderators, please do something!

NNY, but she has always insisted, and other Rafa fans defended her when she would always state that she has never said anything bad about Rafa, that she admires him and wishes him all the best and thinks he is great for the sport. She calls us hypocrites when she is the ultimate in hypocrite! At least we have the same name all the time and don't try to hide our dislike behind an anonymous screenname!

fan4tennis,

Yes, I think we all know of the blatant hypocrisy with this individual. Maybe she thinks that by hiding under another screen name, that she can fool us into thinking that it's someone else who is attacking Rafa and his fans.

The irony of ironies here is that this is the same person who confronted me and others about using a different screen name on another tennis forum. You just have to sit back and shake your head.

The bad english is a very amateurish attempt to hide her normal writing style, grammer and basic points of attack, but it's still the same old, same old. With Rafa winning so much this year, being so dominant and making history, all she and other Fed fans have left is sorry attempts to demean Rafa and his fans. Sore losers to the end!

I am so glad that you are here. We need another strong voice here.

fan4tennis: she has been blistering me on another site for calling her out on the hypocrisy her phony principles of "never badmouthing any player" which she does all lf the time. She mentioned Murray was petulant and I reminded her of that. But, I received the psychoanalysis that would beat al. others. One poster found it amusing to read her amateur attempt to psychoanalyze me, and since he mentioned that she has disappeared. LOOL. Then, she further proceeded to write a very lengthy list enumerating ALL of Nadal's faults, as she perceived them to be in her mind. If you take the comments in her many posts here on this thread, put them together on a single list, and do a comparison, you'd see that a lot of the same was mentioned on the other site, in better grammar (I wouldn't say that it's becoming of an English major as she professes to be, but a lot better than her spamming posts) you'll see the other lists matches the many posts on this thread.

I wonder why she didn't make one long list here, as it would have saved her some time, but I suppose time is something of which she has an abundance. Anyway, more power to her. I don't care about her many psots, and listing Nadal's negatives, as she's entitled to do so as a poster, but I do object to her abusive name calling and her mentioning my personal information, e.g., my educational background. She went so far as to call me a nutcase because I questioned her statement that Murray is petulant. It's funny when she becomes angry and wants to defend her fave, she forgets her friendship (hypocritical though it is) with the djokovic fans. She also mentioned his numerous breaking of rackets, etc.. The quotation: "oh what a tangled web we weave, when at first we practise to deceive" is very appropos in her case.

If any of you have a chance to read the thread on Federer's Video on the other site, you'll see her long list of pet peeves, and you'll have a better understanding of what I'm talking about.

To spend soooooo much time creating numerous aliases, it makes me wonder how she is ever handling her schoolwork. (Note the sarcasm...lol)

I have alot of time on my hands right now but only because I'm on a boat. I am here NNY (came back before final of USO)! And I have a 'friend' that can tell me what Rafa says now since he also speaks Spanish. At least we stick with the same name thruout so conversations and debates can rage on with the correct people instead of being interrupted by dipwads!

fan4tennis,

I have read some of your posts indicating that you were traveling on a boat with a companion. It sounds like a lot of fun! Maybe you will learn to speak fluent Spanish!:)

Dear heart - I am just so happy to see you here, whether you are posting on a boat, on land, sea or on a mountaintop! We have been through so much and, as we have seen, it appears that the craziness is not about to end. This person has way too much time on her hands. However, it's kind of flattering to think of her making of more creative screen names and going through the effort of creating these hilarious posts with the sadly obvious broken english! So much effort in such a petty cause.

All because our Rafa dared to win the career grand slam, along with winning RG, Wimbledon and the USO in the same year, the first man to do it since the great Rod Laver in 1969, only he did it on three surfaces! I just saying that again and again.

Maybe that should be our unanimous response when this person comes rolling around again with more nonsensical and garbled rants! :)

Sorry, typos!

I meant to say that I just LOVE saying that again and again! Let's keep focusing on Rafa's great accomplishments this year! Just think what will happen if he manages to win the 2011 AO! Oh no, the craziness will be worse than ever. If Rafa can pull it off, I won't care!

Not JUST a career grand slam like the 7 (?) others BUT, a career GOLDEN grand slam that he shares ONLY with Agassi!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Plus being named the SECOND most influential athlete in a poll that included men from all walks of life, not just sports!

Keep it coming! Just hearing all of it again, makes me realize how lucky we have been to see Rafa truly earn his spot among the greatest to play the game! There is so much to be happy about and it would be a shame to let some obsessive Fed fan try to spoil it. I realize that some of them are just about to go off the deep end, because they just can't handle it. Too bad, because I expect we will see more great things from Rafa in 2011!

Vamos, Rafa!

So do you believe me now that tennisnba is none other that the queen of lunatic fedfarts maxi? hehe. Well, I sensed it before that she was trying to post in broken English to hide her true identity but my impression tells that she no other than the Lunatic Queen. Just look at her posts (old & recent), though it's broken, you can hardly find mispelled words and sometimes she was caught unguarded using good vocabulary. A person who is bad in grammar (broken) is definitely bad in vocabulary too, JUST LIKE ME. I know it pretty well because I am talking based on my own struggle in English hahaha.

MABUHAY ANG PILIPINAS :-]]

NNY: now you're really using that wooden spoon ;-) I'm hoping Rafa will be on form for Paris Masters. We know he doesnt care for indoor tournaments but he did make it to the final once whereas Roger has never been further than the QF.

Raindrops: English maybe your second language but you manage pretty well.

If u guys r right about tennisnba's/rogerlove's identity, then I am shocked and baffled :(
BTW Sorry guys, but Andy's gotta beat Fed at AO next year...am already casting runes..

@Ricky

still no thread for Basel & valencia!!

If there is a thread for Basel I vote we Rafans boycott it - that way she will end up having to talk to herself in pigeon English.

@ed

Better boycott all the tournaments of a particular player ..i hope that will make you very very happy.

Raindrops,

I was with you from the start. There is no doubt as to the fact that it was her. On the other tennis forum, she said exactly the same things about Rafa, only in her usual form of writing.

Sorry, deuce, but it is sadly all too true. I am with ed in saying that we boycott a Basel thread and let this unfortunate person talk to herself in pigeon english. Very well said, ed! I am with you on that one. Maybe if no one takes the bait, then she will get tired of these ridiculous and childish games.

I know it's hard for some Fed fans to face reality, but the fact is that Rafa has had a phenomenal year. Too bad that some just can't realize that this is the way of things. A great player has to eventually start to decline and no longer dominate and a younger champion comes along and takes his place. It doesn't have to be the apocalypse or the end of the world as we know it.

Besides, there are other talented players who deserve a chance to realize their potential. We all know that deuce is anxiously awaiting Murray's first slam win and the Nole fans are excited about their guy's resurgence. It's a wonderful time in men's tennis, if one doesn't become so obsessed with their own personal favorite that they go off the deep end when anyone else wins.

Yes I'm happy that Rafa is now at the top of the rankings again, long may it continue! I'm hoping to see the top four consisting of Rafa/Nole/Murray/Delpo, and Berdych/Cilic in the top ten. It's time for this group of early to mid twenties age group guys to shine!

If you are smart, do not argue with a fool... people like nadaloverestimation is clearly a hater... in my country we also call black people nigre, but absolutely we are not a racist, it is just a language... If Nadal is a racist, he will never go to India.... I am so happy after USO 10. In very young age he could own the 4 grandslams... No one better than him at the moment... VAMOS RAFA!!!

The fans of arrogant Nadal is always written in Roger's topic. stupid?

players are always made to wait time. useless time is spent. misbehavior of medical time out. saliva is vomited in the clay court.

formally protested against by other players in the past. To the nadal's usage at egocentric time. annoying move in play. annoyingness of movement when win.

and the trophy is always bitten like the infant. muscular power. always shout play

tennisnba

I superadd. Do you know? Nadal said nigger-, To the black man. a racist. hypocrite. I never admit Nadal. And, arrogant Nadal's fan is really hated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFIVbyKIGQw

nadaloverestim ation

haha