Vaaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmoooooooossssssssssss!

Kelli, which draw are you looking at? This is the 2nd time you've got it wrong about who will meet in the SF, Rafa and Roger cannot meet until the final because they are on opposite sides of the draw.


Vamos Rafa!

I'm really hoping for a big week from Rafa. I'd love to see him have some success this week, to give himself a glimpse of hope for the U.S. Open. Last week's loss to Dodig was a bit of a disaster, but what's done is done, and he has to move on. The year is not over yet, so Rafa does have a few more chances to make up for the tough losses he's suffered. He's had a great year, but losing 5 finals is kinda rough, especially when it's to the same guy.

Now that all the attention is on Djokovic, that may be a good thing for Rafa, as it now gives him the opportunity to re-assess where his game is, determine what changes need to be made, and go out and apply those changes on the court. If Rafa's gonna turn things around, it has to start one match at a time, slowly putting the pieces of his game back in place, especially the mental part. Once he begins to start playing like himself again, mentally and physically, I think he'll be ready to face Djokovic again. I believe when the time comes, Rafa will have a bigger, better game plan in mind for Djokovic and by faith, I believe he'll beat him.

First and foremost though, is Cincy. He's got a tricky draw to get through, but if he is to snap out of this mental funk he's in, it would be great to see that process start here, one match at a time. I'm wishing Rafa the best of luck this week. Like all great champions, he'll find a way to bounce back. I know he will.

@djb247365 , 8/15/11 10:07 AM

My sentiments exactly. Rafa says his serve broke down in the 2nd set during the Dodig match, I feel that's due to lack of concentration. I got the feeling that he was rushing through the match for some reason, either because he wanted to finish before the rain started or there was some Rael Madrid match on that day that he wanted to catch so he wasn't concentrating 100% on what he was doing, then Dodig raised his game and was in the groove because his serve started clicking and Rafa just couldn't recover his good form in the first and half of the 2nd sets.

Rafa is playing well and when he is confident no one is better to watch than him. Tennis needs Rafa competitive again, because tennis needs him - full stop!

Vamos Rafa!

Nadal should retire lol

Ode to Rafa, the Great:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/08/14/rafael-nada l-a-man-who-never-quits-or-makes-excuses.html

May I take the liberty of quoting from a passage in the above article:

"Most remarkably, he denies he?s better than Federer, even though he holds a huge edge, 17?8, over the player he calls ?the best in history.? Of course, humility is as much a part of the wallpaper of sport as Muhammad Ali?s boasting. It?s often good strategy to praise an adversary, all the better to aggrandize yourself. If Federer is the best ever and you beat him ? well, you don?t need to say the rest."

........please don't shoot the messenger, this is a direct quote from the writer, a man who clearly understands Rafa........

Exactly, RITB. Only unrealistic people will disagree with what is said above.

Rafa is a great guy, there's no denying it.

Kelli is probably looking at the real draw which got picked but the published draw is the draw fixed by ATP to ensure Rafa and Roger are on opposite sides with Andy and Djoko in their halves.

You know rafaelite, you make a good point. This is the 2nd time Kelli has put Roger and Rafa on the same side when the pulished draw says otherwise. I am almost sure nos 2 & 3 are placed in the draw it doesn't happen by chance that they always end up on the same side. Until they do it in public and everyone sees it happen it's open to suspicion.

"Most remarkably, he denies he?s better than Federer, even though he holds a huge edge, 17?8

rafaisthebest, 8/15/11 3:06 PM

such a bore champers.:p when you consider majority of those wins are on clay - 11 I believe.

It's about time he started to practice more on hard court and grass. Of course he's not better than federer! Bruce Almighty!

Very poor showings there, comparing their head to head to the mighty federer, who is the best on grass and hard by a country mile.

Rafa needs more practice and rafa fans know it.

Stop crying over spilt milk.

Fleur,

12 of those 17 wins are on clay.

12 of those 17 wins are on clay.

numero , 8/15/11 7:03 PM



And your point is?

holdserve/rafaelite and nadline,

I've explained in the past that Rafa is only better than Roger on clay where 56% of their meetings have been. Roger is better on every other surface.

numero, how is Roger better than Rafa on h/c when they have beaten each other the same number of times? 4-4. On grass they are 2-1 to Federer that hardly qualifies as Federer being better than Rafa on grass.

We seem to have is a serious outbreak of data being taken out of context to bolster a weak argument or to disparage another person's point of view. Better known as Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.

This should do the trick. Sorry to butt in but sometimes it is easier when you look at a clear picture. Please please try to grasp the numbers nadaline. And you keep trying to make Fed weak by comparing stats. He (TMF) is champions of 90% of all stats..

FedEx ATP Reliability Index On Hard Current* Index YTD Titles YTD Win-Loss Career Index Career Titles Career Win-Loss
1. Roger Federer .877 1 24-5 .825 45 470-100
2. Novak Djokovic .867 5 29-0 .793 19 230-60
3. Rafael Nadal .827 0 19-5 .764 11 246-76

sienna,

nadline, rintb, rafaelite are completely discombobulated by the awesomeness of the swiss maestro :P

your above figures are proof!

go to germany and join the hoff discombobulaters!

ha! to be a one-master on one-surface is not something to downplay, but see what federer has achieved and you can only dream discombobulators.

figures don't lie.

why are you upset with the truth?

clay clay clay clay clay clay clay clay clay clay clay clay? (12) out of 17 :P

how is that better than fed?

that is all you can repeat.

CLAY!

Ah typical! Name-calling is the last resort when there are no facts to support one's argument. No scientific studies this time?

The article has been fixed. :)

numero, I don't understand why it makes a difference that many of Nadal's wins came on clay. I mean, unless you are willing to do the same and discount Federer's wins on hard courts. Clay counts too.

I just think that the h2h would be a better representation of their all-court abilities if say half of the matches were on HC, 35% on clay and 15% on grass which is the relative weighting of the season. Honestly Cheryl if 56% of their matches were on fast indoor courts (Roger's best surface) do you think it would be the same h2h?

Roger made it to a lot of clay finals to face Rafa because he has been clearly the second best clay player for years. Rafa is not that good on HC overall for his career hence he rarely met Roger there was he was in his prime.

I think too much is made of their h2h since Rafa is clayking and really nobody beat him consistently, until Nole this year, on clay. However players like Davydenko and Nole who can beat him consistently on hard courts have better h2h.

cheryl,

Thank you for pointing out the obvious when it comes to the h2h between Rafa and Fed. Until Fed fans came along, you never heard anyone being foolish enough to discount wins on clay as somehow inferior or less important or valuable. This is why I don't care to even get into this discussion.

Fed fans proceed from a false premise, i.e. that clay wins must by necessity be given less weight because Fed hasn't won nearly as many as Rafa!

You cannot argue with anyone who has arbitrarily decided to give more credence to hard court wins over clay wins.

numero, Rafa didn't get to h/c finals to meet Roger in his earlier years because he was still learning his craft and Roger was that much older. Rafa took to clay naturally at a very young age whilst it took Roger up till the age of 23 to start winning anything substantial on any surface. You can't say that if they'd played more matches indoors, grass or h/c then Roger would have the upper hand because the one time they met in a h/c final in a GS Rafa won, they've met 3 times on grass in a GS final and their h2h is 2-1 to Roger and they have a 4-4 h2h on h/c overall so I can't see how you can come to that conclusion.

People who discount clay should realise that some of the greatest players in history couldn't hack it on clay, Sampras for example because it is the most demanding of all the surfaces by all account.

Roger should thank his lucky stars that he hasn't meet Rafa more often on h/c and grass because he wouldn't have had 16 GS for sure. The first time they played a 5 setter on h/c when Rafa was only 17 and Roger was 22, Rafa won - so much for your theory.

número forgets that half the hard courts are slower ones, and Rafa's hard court H2H with Fed is 4-4, 3-1 on outdoor hard courts and 0-3 on indoor hard courts. If both Fed and Rafa reach all the hard court finals, chances are their H2H on hard courts would be about equal, unless número thinks that Fed is not good enough to reach the finals on slower hard courts to meet Rafa there. So all these assumptions that had Fed met Rafa more often on hard courts, he'll have a better H2H against Rafa are simply not true, as they've already met eight times on hard
courts, not once or twice, if Fed was that much better than Rafa, we should be having something like 6-2, 7-1 or even 8-0 H2H in Fed'a favor, instead now we have 4-4!

Anyone trying to split hairs about their h2h should explain the split:

Rafa/Roger

Clay....................................12-2

All other surfaces..................5-6

Rafa is far better than Roger on clay and they are equal on other surfaces.

Exactly nadline. Even if they were to meet less often on clay, maybe half of what they had met now, ie 7 instead of 14 times, Rafa would win 6 and Fed may be only 1 time. Their H2H would be 11-7, Rafa still won 60% of their encounters. Rafa is simply excellent on clay and as good as Fed on clay and grass once he reached his prime, ie from 2008 onwards. As I've mentioned before many times, Rafa has consistently ended the seasons from 2008-2010 as the top two players on hard courts. Even with his injury issues in 2009, he still finish as the top player on hard courts or tie with Nole on hard courts.

Rafa is excellent on clay and as good as Fed on hard and grass once he reached his prime, ie from 2008onwards.

Yes rafa's prime is as good as Rogers past prime on HC and grass. Thats why it is so lobsided.

But I never have seen a reasonable argument fortaking H2H in a claim for greatness.
H2H is not used by ATP to decide ranking issues, nor is it used in any other way. Only use for h2h is Nadal fans chasing down dreams they (Nadal) can never reach.
H2h can of course be tempered with. Agassi has revealed in his Open book that he on purpose lost a match prior to a different opponent.Just in order to not worsen his h2h against that player. Should Fed have lost to Novak in order to keep his h2h with nadal in check? (again clay)

Roger will take care of bussines with regards to the Nadal h2h they will meet atleast 3 times this year and he will prevail 3 times.

Rafa took to clay naturally at a very young age whilst it took Roger up till the age of 23 to start winning anything substantial on any surface
nadline, 8/16/11 10:17 AM

Roger was 21 when he won Wimbledon. You don't think that's substantial?
Really it shows your lack of tennis knowledge.

The first time they played a 5 setter on h/c when Rafa was only 17 and Roger was 22, Rafa won - so much for your theory.
nadline, 8/16/11 10:24 AM

Correction : The first time they played when Rafa won at age 17 was a best of 3. That was after Roger had suffered from heat stroke at IW the week before.
It was the second time they played, also in Miami, that Roger WON the 5-setter in the final.

Do you even watch tennis?

Talk about putting your foot in your mouth. I think nadline just swallowed both feet at once. Really if this was a fight they'd stop it. I'd win by TKO. At least check your facts before posting blatant misinformation next time.

Sienna, that's actually a good point. Using a single head-to-head statistic as anything other than a prognostication tool for future matches between two particular players is somewhat shortsighted. James Blake once had a winning head to head over Nadal...but I don't think you'd be able to find ANYONE willing to stipulate that Blake is a better tennis player than Rafa.

numero - I do see your point, but Nadline also has a point. If Roger and Rafa were to meet on clay, a Rafa win would be expected. If they met on grass, a Rafa win (given current results) would be probable, but not a given. On hard courts, it's probably even odds.

numero's argument has absolutely no sense. What is he trying to prove? He is picking on irrelevant things like Roger's age when he first started winning which was 21 (actually almost 22) and not 23 to prove that nadline is wrong. But what is the real debate about? Is it about when Fed started winning or whether Rafa is better than Fed? Rafa's head to head with Federer in grand slam finals proves he is better than Fed. Period.
h2h between two top players is important in determining who is better.
Even Sampras said Fed needs to improve the h2h if he wants to be acknowledged as GOAT.
Fed and Rafa were both in their primes between 2008 and 2010 with the no. 1 ranking alternating between them. Fed won 4 gs titles, Rafa 6. And Rafa beat Fed on every surface except indoor hard court. Fed has not beaten Rafa in any grand slam final after 2008. Whether on hard court, grass or clay.
Rafa is better than Fed.
In fact Fed proved clay is not a weak surface for him by beating Djoko this year. But for Rafa, Fed would have 6 gs titles on clay. It is not that Fed's weakest surface is clay, it is just that Rafa was precocious on clay but when he reached the same age of dominance as Fed which is 21-22 , he extended that supremacy over Fed to all gs surfaces.

The Telegraph is running three edited extracts from Rafa's autobiography, Rafa: My Story by Rafael Nadal with John Carlin, here are links to 2 of the first 3:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/rafaelnadal/8703140/Rafa el-Nadal-epic-Wimbledon-triumph-in-2008-against-Roger-Federer-freed-me -from-my-mental-prison.html


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tenn is/8703175/Rafael-Nadal-my-pre-game-rituals-sharpen-my-senses-before-I -go-into-battle.html

So much of what we know about players is filtered through journalists' perspectives.......it is so refreshing to hear it from the players themselves................

Can't wait to get my copy..............

What is 'chasing down dreams that they can never reach'? Rafa's career is not finished, so how can anyone say that his fans can never reach their dreams, whatever those may be?

In the first place, who says Rafa has to match everything or even exceeds everything that Fed has achieved? Fed can have his own records and Rafa his own too; some of Fed's records Rafa may not break but likewise, Fed can never achieve some of the records that Rafa has achieved. At the end of the day, their successes will be measured by those important titles that they won, their dominance over the field, the records that they hold, etc and etc. They are both not done yet where their careers are concerned, so no one can ever say for sure that Rafa can never achieve what Fed has achieved or Rafa's fans can never get what they dream of.

FedEx ATP Reliability Index On Hard Current* Index YTD Titles YTD Win-Loss Career Index Career Titles Career Win-Loss

1. Roger Federer .877 1 24-5 .825 45 470-100
2. Novak Djokovic .867 5 29-0 .793 19 230-60
3. Rafael Nadal .827 0 19-5 .764 11 246-76
Sienna, 8/15/11 9:18 PM

there's really nothing more to add to this.

There is no way that rafa has supremacy, are you kidding the man? being great on all surfaces requires so much more than your head2head. Being great on one surface is easier. It makes no sense to you because you don't want to believe the truth...that is a problem only you can solve, but you won't because you are narrow minded.

What about career win loss record on clay? So does Fed have supremacy on clay? If Fed is being considered great on all surfaces, so is Rafa! After all Rafa has proven that he can win slams on all surfaces, let's wait for three more years and see how Rafa fares in all the slams, as Fed clearly has a three years advantage over Rafa.

To hear Rafans tell it, his single greatest accomplishment of his career is his h2h against Roger. That's all they ever talk about. I think Rafa would beg to differ. He does have the Masters record (although at his current pace Nole may have it next year) and 10 GS isn't shabby either. Now Davydenko may think his greatest career accomplishment is his h2h against Rafa but that's another story.

The reason that Rafa fans point to his superior h2h against Fed, is that he is constantly being measure and compared to Fed in every discussion, even though he started three years later. The argument itself is pointless. Does anyone seriously believe that it would be reasonable for Rafa at 25 to have 16 slam titles? Fed himself couldn't do it, so why would anyone expect Rafa to have done it?

This is why I don't like to participate in this endless argument. Why should Rafa be measure purely in terms of Fed's accomplishments? He has his own records, as lucky pointed out so well. I think the h2h advantage that Rafa holds is even more remarkable, given that he did start playing three years after Fed, had to beat him when he was in his prime and dominating everyone else and that he was less experienced. It's truly a remarkable feat and significant statistic which simply cannot be ignored. Of course, I can understand why Fed fans would choose to ignore it at all costs.

Fed fans always try to define the parameters of this argument. Therefore, Rafa can never win because Fed has three years on him. My belief is that we should wait for both their careers to end before we try to assess their respective places in tennis history.

I think 70 % of the big tourneys are on HC, 25% on clay and 5% on grass. So I actually give the non mandatory masters Monte Carlo the same stature as the others. To be honest it should not be in the same league as the other 8 Masters toerneys in order to get a full and unbiased view of each players performance in the big tourneys.

Obviously HC is the most important surface (2 out of 4 slams, 6 out 9 masters and WTC) in order to set some standards or benchmarks about defining the greater player, we most take this into account and use it as a fact when discussing those issues. That is clearly lost on Nadaninos (except luckystar. She does has got some wisdom and is using sometimes logic and reason but not when you go over the top in protecting Rafa. Like in youre previous post.
Actually in the stat I showed about the HC I left out Andy Roddick who still has a better HC record then Nadal.
I do not think Rafa is greatest material when it comes to HC which containes 70% of his job! The proof is in his win-loss record on HC.

Obviously slams should count the strongest the WTC and the the 8 or 9 ? masters.
But then the weigth of clay tourneys will only be reduced even further.
So you have to stay biased and do not let you fanbased hopes take the better of you.Just try to use logic thinking and an unbiased view on stats and matter be the judge and you wil find that Nadal is not 3 years shy of Fed or 5 but a lifetime in tennis.
I believe I have now set some good parametres of where we can start a new discussion. Lets try to look at the 4 slams, WTC and the 8 mandatory masters in order to put an end to the discussions about FEDAL. We should look at those 13 events and see who comes out on top.

unbiased Like I always do.

sienna unbiased???

Nobody question about Fed's prowess on hard courts. However he can lord over everyone except Rafa and Murray, on the hard courts. On clay Rafa lord over everyone, including Fed. Rafa's successes are more on clay and Fed's on the hard courts. Rafa is still top five or six on hard courts where career win/loss or titles are concerned among the active players, not forgetting the likes of Fed, Roddick, Hewitt, Davy are all older than him and spend longer times in the tours accumulating their titles. Fed has managed only 11 titles on clay in his long career, winning 16 % of his titles on clay, so he too falls short of that 60:10:30 combination on all surfaces.

As I've mentioned earlier, Rafa has since 2008, finished each season as the top two guys on hard courts, so in another two to three years time, who knows, he may be a top three guy on hard courts, career wise, among active players (and I assume Fed is still around as an active
player then).

Monte Carlo is a mandatory event right up to 2008, so to dismiss it as if all along it's not important is not doing it any justice. Fed only miss it once, in 2010, and Nole only miss it this year. The top four guys are always there, and it's at Monte Carlo that Gasquet has his first victory over Fed.

Semi final against Federer ?

He is in Murray's draw.

Poor Fedtards.................to paraphrase Michael Mewshaw, it is Rafa's apostasy in beating Federer over and over that clouds their judgment.

On a more uplifting note, Rafa's latest Facebook note, "After two weeks in North America I have won a match! with my partner Marc López!" .............Yey! He is such a goofball.............................

Beautiful quote from Rafa in guardian.co.uk:

"Losing is the toughest part of the game," he said, "but, at the same time, it's the really beautiful part of the game. If you don't lose, you cannot enjoy the victories. So I have to accept both things."

Kipling could not have put it better. (Guardian writer's quote)

One more thing, sienna, who are you to set the parameters? Fed clearly has the advantage over Rafa as he started earlier than Rafa in his career and started winning his slams in 2003. Why only include eight masters when MC is only non mandatory since 2009? So you're eager to ignore Rafa's MC titles just because your Fed can't get his hands on that trophy? Mandatory or not, Fed is still there all the time, except 2010, and he still can't win there. I bet if Fed has one MC title, you won't want to dismiss the MC tournament that readily the way you're doing now!

@rafaisthebest , 8/17/11 3:42 AM

So profound.


Vamos Rafa!

OK Andy you've done quite enough learning about "the beauty of losing." Time for the other....

I don't think Andy finds losing beautiful. It is only our crazy philosophical Rafa.

Listen Lucky it all started with someone claiming or doubting Fed capability on HC. Stupid because as you said or meant to say he is the best.

I don't think anyone doubted Fed's capability on HC. Could you reproduce that remark?
I don't have the patience to search this thread but if I remember correctly, Fed fans were trying to claim that somehow results on clay weren't valid.

deuce, good one there about Murray.

vij - yes crazy Rafa indeed!

Rafaelite to freshen youre memory. His records clearlyu shows he's better then Nadal esp. on HC which containes 70 % of all tennis the top players do.

numero, how is Roger better than Rafa on h/c when they have beaten each other the same number of times? 4-4. On grass they are 2-1 to Federer that hardly qualifies as Federer being better than Rafa on grass.
nadline
, 8/15/11 8:54 PM

@Luckystar
Sometimes it is easy to be unbiased and without perjudice against players, you can look at facts very balanced.
So a few weeks ago I went into detail with you about the swift rise ofNadal.Well that was for greater part to do withthe fact the Nadal teamlet him play only on clay before devoloppingamore natura type of season (HC 70%). Youre claim that he is becomming better and better onthe fast HC has not gone by unnoticed by me. But the downfall of that is his time hasrun out. He should have learnt the trick of that court years ago not playing all those clay tourneys in order to reach swift rise to the atpranking.
Actually a pitty that he did not do that immediatedly because he could have beenthe clear second GOAT of tennis.

good win for rafa! almost thought he was heading for a montreal-esque match yet again!..

one point at a time..one match at a time!

Don't worry darling Sienna, Rafa is the first goat so why should he have followed your advice to become the second goat? Why be second when you can be first, that's what Rafa thought and followed the advice of Uncle Toni instead of charlatan Sienna.
Your hero, unfortunately, is not a goat but a (Swiss) cow.

sienna, why is it too late now for Rafa on the hard courts? He already has two hard court slams now, and he has improved his game so much that he can win on any surface, so I don't think it's too late for him to win slams on hard courts. I don't expect Nole to pick up all the slams, as he may feel weary too, Nole is human. In fact he looked tired in that Montreal final last week. As for Murray and Delpo, Rafa ranked at least at the same level with them if not better, on the hard courts. Remember, Rafa has two hard court slams, on both quick and slower surfaces, whilst Nole has his two on slower hard court surfaces. Delpo has one and Murray yet to win his. So I think Rafa has as good a chance at winning a hard court slam as the others. No
doubt Nole may be the favorite to win a hard court slam now, but there are matches to be played and there are players who have the abilities to beat him. To me, it very much depends on the draws these days, as each player would have his own matchup problems with certain players, and that's why tennis matches can be interesting.

numero from your obsession with bleacher report I think you are active there. The worst writer there according to a friend of mine who stopped posting there this Feb, the worst writer is a guy called casenti whose knowledge of tennis is abysmal and his only selling point is hatred of Rafa. He sounds very much like you so I am sure you are he.
So casenti/ brokenserve/numero how's the company in your old people's home? I suspect you must be the fittest person there. The rest must be busy discussing arthritis, blood pressure, diabetes, choked arteries, or brittle bones. Boring eh? Is that why you turn your hyena self to TT to hunt poor innocent Rafa fans? But guess what, sometimes the hunter becomes the hunted!
By the way is Sienna your multiple ID? This person's language skills seem to be extremely variable. Seems to be a fake. Is he/she you or somebody else currently not posting? You two seem to be the only two active Fed fans.

numero from your obsession with bleacher report I think you are active there. The worst writer there according to a friend of mine who stopped posting there this Feb, the worst writer is a guy called casenti whose knowledge of tennis is abysmal and his only selling point is hatred of Rafa. He sounds very much like you so I am sure you are he.
So casenti/ brokenserve/numero how's the company in your old people's home? I suspect you must be the fittest person there. The rest must be busy discussing arthritis, blood pressure, diabetes, choked arteries, or brittle bones. Boring eh? Is that why you turn your hyena self to TT to hunt poor innocent Rafa fans? But guess what, sometimes the hunter becomes the hunted!
By the way is Sienna your multiple ID? This person's language skills seem to be extremely variable. Seems to be a fake. Is he/she you or somebody else currently not posting? You two seem to be the only two active Fed fans.

correction:Is he/she you or some other ID currently not posting?

To paraphrase Yoda :

Rattled, you have become.

You even posted this on the wrong thread holdserve/rafaelite.

casenti/sienna/brokenserve/numero, it isn't the wrong thread. You just have your head screwed on wrong.

http://www.rediff.com/sports/slide-show/slide-show-1-parents-separatio n-destroyed-me-claims-nadal-book-extract/20110818.htm

Please go through this link. Rafa says how the news of his parents seperation got him into depression and completely crumpled his body and took away his desire totally to play. He says you have to wait for that desire to return and that is what he did and it showed in 2010.

Surely the losses in 2011 to Novak are no way close to the depression he suffered, hope the desire and killer instinct returns back soon and hes back to his winning title accumulation ways.

Thanks for this sanju. I'm waiting to read the book as a book. It was evident that Rafa was emotionally drained in 2009 only unrealistic people couldn't see that. Just imagine if that hadn't happened, he could have had 16 gs by now not Roger.

I was as eager as anybody to get my hands on the book but having read some of the extracts I'm not sure I can face wading through such clunking, heavy-handed prose interspersed with worn-out cliches and tired metaphors. There is no hint of the authentic Rafa voice.