The Unofficial 2014 Aussie Open Thread

#51
#51
Before this thread becomes moot, did anyone see Ferrer shoves the linesman out of his way in his match against Berdych (I believe)? He has a history of doing this.

I am not sure how this is allowed to stand. There are videos on youtube of him doing it to another linesman a couple years back.

In both cases he was toweling off between points. He goes to put his towel back in the chair used by the linesmen. Ferrer purposely puts himself in the linesman's path as he goes to the chair and then uses a forearm to push the linesman out of the way. Maybe I can attach a video. It is blatant.Ferrer shoves linesman during loss - YouTube
 
#53
#53
kidbourbon said:
(1)
Roger Federer will not win another major.

(2)
I think Nadal will get 16. I'll assume he wins Aussie. That's 14. I can see him unexpectedly losing the French this year. Djokovic came so close last year to beating him. I think this year he may pull it off. I'll go ahead and give Rafa the 2015 French. He'll still be the best clay court player in the world, and if Djoker wins it this year, he won't be as maniacally motivated to win it in subsequent years. This will be the last French Rafa wins. For his sixteenth, I'm giving him one more Wimbledon. I'm not sure what year, but I think he'll do it. He's gotta be pissed about his early exits the last two years.

So Fed will end up with 17. Rafa will end up with 16. But the general consensus years down the road will be that Rafa is the best player who ever played the game. I actually think it's getting real real hard to make an argument for Federer...and keep a straight face.

Djokovic will end up with 12 majors.

Murray will end up with 4.

I'm not sure anymore if Delpo will get another one, but I'm rooting for him.

An american will win a major in 2020. I don't know his name, but it'll happen.
Click to expand...

I had meant to address your last two comments in this post as well. I agree about Delpo; it's looking more and more like he is a Roddick, Rafter, or Hewitt. Best case scenario, maybe he's a Safin that pulls off another unexpected major within the next few years.

Regarding an American winning again, which doesn't seem likely anytime soon, seems like I heard that there's a 16-18 year old American that's supposed to be really good coming up. I can't recall his name. Anyone know? If true, hopefully he doesn't end up like Freddy Adu in soccer. I remember hearing about how he was going to be the next phenom at the age of 14. I haven't heard his name in years.
 
#55
#55
DyronNix said:
I think with his present form, Fred can win another major although it is more unlikely than likely. Especially once he figures out the new stick. But his continued back issues will also have a lot to say about it. Plus, if he gets a little help with the draw or top players are upset before he has to play them that could benefit him as well. Possible, but not likely.

I would like to state for the record how remarkable it is that at 32 Fred is still competing in the semis of majors. Only against one player do you say he has virtually no shot of winning. The haters are taking their shots at him at the twilight of his career because he is capable of getting thwacked on any given day. Fine. But let's revisit Nadal at age 32 to see how he is doing in the majors at that point. Same for Djoker and Murray. In fact, look back over tennis history to see where 32 year old Fred matches up against the greats of the game when they were 32. It is just another factor in what makes him a sports legend.

No idea how many Rafa ends up with. Maybe 13, maybe 23. Who has a true gauge on his health? We've always been led to believe his knees are on the brink and could go at any minute. Truthfully, I think Rafa is like Rain Man and a tennis savant. Quirky as hell and and mental enigma. Instead of card counting, he is a tennis player. That's not meant in disrespect but Nadal just ain't normal.

Who will rise up to challenge him? I agree that the French is not a foregone conclusion for him this year simply based on Novak's past two years' performances there. Take Nadal, Djoker, Fed and Murray out of the picture. Who is there that would make you tune in to watch pro tennis? That's what I'm saying. There's only a couple players out there that could even possibly give the top guys a scare on their best days. The point being that the top of the chain should keep racking up titles in the foreseeable future. Ralph is the top of the chain.

Right now it's Rafa's world, and all the rest are just living in it.
Click to expand...

Very reasonable post. This is in no means an attack on Federer, but what is your take on a previous comment I made about Nadal having more competition throughout the majority of his career than Federer? (I'm thinking Fed for about the first 3-5 years he arrived in the international spotlight.)
 
#56
#56
volprof said:
Very reasonable post. This is in no means an attack on Federer, but what is your take on a previous comment I made about Nadal having more competition throughout the majority of his career than Federer? (I'm thinking Fed for about the first 3-5 years he arrived in the international spotlight.)
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's tortured logic, but I see players like Federer and Nadal as true legends of the game no matter what era and no matter their competition. In Federer's 5 year run of dominance, he was going to dominate whomever was on the other side of the net. In slam finals, he can only defeat the person opposite him and did. The larger point being, he still wins if he plays historical McEnroe or Sampras or Lendl or Agassi, etc. Same for Nadal at his absolute peak years.

We aren't talking about the regular "great" player, we are talking about two legends. There is something palpably different about their games and accomplishments standing alone.

Those that diminish Federer's claim to greatness based upon who he defeated in certain slams should be careful for two reasons.

(1) You can't knock Federer without also discounting Nadal's claim to greatness. Nadal has defeated Federer in 6 slam finals. If Federer isn't all he is made out to be, then those 6 wins are less significant. (2) Looking behind the curtain at Nadal's own slam wins reveals 6 final wins against Federer. Aside from Federer, Nadal has defeated Djokovic, Ferrer, Puerta, Soderling, and Berdych in slam finals. Impressive, no? No.

Both Fed and Rafa have beaten Djoker in slam finals. That leaves Ferrer, Puerta, Soderling and Berdych. Ouch.

I have been following tennis since the late 70s and have no problem acknowledging Fed's and Rafa's claims to legendary status.
 
#58
#58
I don't think I've ever seen Nadal as quiet as that. He had about as much "vamonos" as an emotionless gutter. I honestly thought he was just going to retire late in the second. I still have no clue how he won the third, although Wawrinka's poor play was probably the primary factor. As a Nadal fan since he arrived, that was really painful to watch. But credit to Wawrinka: he had the most impressive tournament, and he deserves the win.

On a related note, I think I'm going to change my Nadal predictions already. I don't think he ends up with anymore than 2-3 more majors, instead of the initial 4-6 I stated. I just don't see his body holding up long enough, especially with guys like Djoker, Murray, possibly even Wawrinka to compete against.
 
#59
#59
volprof said:
I don't think I've ever seen Nadal as quiet as that. He had about as much "vamonos" as an emotionless gutter. I honestly thought he was just going to retire late in the second. I still have no clue how he won the third, although Wawrinka's poor play was probably the primary factor. As a Nadal fan since he arrived, that was really painful to watch. But credit to Wawrinka: he had the most impressive tournament, and he deserves the win.

On a related note, I think I'm going to change my Nadal predictions already. I don't think he ends up with anymore than 2-3 more majors, instead of the initial 4-6 I stated. I just don't see his body holding up long enough, especially with guys like Djoker, Murray, possibly even Wawrinka to compete against.
Click to expand...

I worry about Rafa staying healthy. At this rate, he will be held together with duct tape by the end of his career. I think his major run will become exceedingly difficult in the future. Same for Fed, and I am a bigger Fed fan.. I wish the absolute best for both. As Dyron mentioned, both are legends - and both are still playing. Count our blessings, I say.
 
#60
#60
Side note. Although Rafa was injured, I saw Wawrinka make shots today where I paused and though HE doesn't have that shot!. Apparently, he does...
 
#61
#61
This is one of the first slam finals that I didn't watch at all since 2004. When I woke up and saw the score, I wasn't shocked but was surprised. That is, I knew Stan was capable of beating Nadal but couldn't really believe he would do so in his first slam final. If you look at their recent matchup history (from my recollection anyway), their matches have been tie-breaker set matches. So, very very close.

Not sure this changes a lot in the world of men's tennis. That remains to be seen.

Now, on to the worst part of the year for the tennis fan. The wait in between Melbourne and Paris. See you guys in June.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#62
#62
DyronNix said:
This is one of the first slam finals that I didn't watch at all since 2004. When I woke up and saw the score, I wasn't shocked but was surprised. That is, I knew Stan was capable of beating Nadal but couldn't really believe he would do so in his first slam final. If you look at their recent matchup history (from my recollection anyway), their matches have been tie-breaker set matches. So, very very close.

Not sure this changes a lot in the world of men's tennis. That remains to be seen.

Now, on to the worst part of the year for the tennis fan. The wait in between Melbourne and Paris. See you guys in June.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


I hope Rafa's back isn't too much of a problem.
 
#63
#63
volprof said:
I know you guys know more about tennis than I do, but if I'm not mistaken, didn't at least 4-6 of Fed's majors come before the arrival of Nadal? In other words, at least 4-6 came when his stiffest competition was Roddick, Hewitt, and Safin (a laughable list)? The two are close, but one thing that has always impressed me about Nadal, is how he's managed to win 13 already, having steeper competition for more of his career than Federer (Fed, Djoker, Murray). Plus, if I'm also not mistaken, didn't Fed's sole French title come the year Nadal was out? Alas, staying healthy is part of the game though, just as much as one's play, so I don't suppose you can hold that against Fed.
Click to expand...


Yes. I think it's more than six. He feasted on Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, an old Agassi, and Marcos Baghdatis.

And it came the year Rafa got beat by Soderling.
 
#64
#64
DyronNix said:
Perhaps it's tortured logic, but I see players like Federer and Nadal as true legends of the game no matter what era and no matter their competition. In Federer's 5 year run of dominance, he was going to dominate whomever was on the other side of the net. In slam finals, he can only defeat the person opposite him and did. The larger point being, he still wins if he plays historical McEnroe or Sampras or Lendl or Agassi, etc. Same for Nadal at his absolute peak years.

We aren't talking about the regular "great" player, we are talking about two legends. There is something palpably different about their games and accomplishments standing alone.

Those that diminish Federer's claim to greatness based upon who he defeated in certain slams should be careful for two reasons.

(1) You can't knock Federer without also discounting Nadal's claim to greatness. Nadal has defeated Federer in 6 slam finals. If Federer isn't all he is made out to be, then those 6 wins are less significant. (2) Looking behind the curtain at Nadal's own slam wins reveals 6 final wins against Federer. Aside from Federer, Nadal has defeated Djokovic, Ferrer, Puerta, Soderling, and Berdych in slam finals. Impressive, no? No.

Both Fed and Rafa have beaten Djoker in slam finals. That leaves Ferrer, Puerta, Soderling and Berdych. Ouch.

I have been following tennis since the late 70s and have no problem acknowledging Fed's and Rafa's claims to legendary status.
Click to expand...

Not following your logic. Federer is better than Hewitt and Roddick. He beat them every time. Those six wins by Nadal are more sigificant than beating Roddick, Newitt, or Baghdatis.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top