tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:40:03
From: wkhedr
Subject: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.

What is going on?






 
Date: 30 Jan 2009 10:47:27
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired, right=
? no
> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired =
now
> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he i=
s
> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> What is going on?

The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
take advantage of his fatigue.

Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
with Tipex.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:49:43
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 22:39, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 4:28=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 30 jan, 22:18, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 4:14=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 30 jan, 21:41, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to=
beat
> > > > > > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > > > > > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is=
he's
> > > > > > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Fede=
rer, at
> > > > > > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to =
hand
> > > > > > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 sho=
uld be
> > > > > > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 h=
ours,
> > > > > unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
> > > > > ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.
>
> > > > Maybe Fed uses more energy to speed up the game and Nadal gives
> > > > himself more time to relax between points, =A0retreating far behind=
the
> > > > baseline to set up the counter. A certain style using up more time,
> > > > doesn't necessarily mean it's more draining than the other.
>
> > > > You could say Fed is more like the 100m sprinter and Nadal the 500m
> > > > distance runner. Both will give it their all to finish first and
> > > > should therefore be similarly spent crossing the finish line. They
> > > > just distribute their energy differently.
>
> > > > > At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I =
hope
> > > > > you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
> > > > > pro- or anti-Fed
>
> > > > I'm not, since I know you're pro-the-guy-who's-record-is-on-the-lin=
e
> > > > Sampras :D
>
> > > I'm not sure what you're wanting to read from me. No excuses for Rafa=
.
> > > Full credit if Fed wins.
>
> > I don't want to read anything, really. Just discussing with you since
> > imo you generally make good arguments. Fortunately, I don't agree with
> > all of them, besides that would kill the discussion and where's the
> > fun in that.
>
> > BTW I liked Sampras and his game in particular very much. Now I like
> > his record to be equalled. :D-
>
> I'm pretty sure you're going to enjoy Sunday's final :)

Let's hope you're right and Rafa doesn't spoil it for me :)


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:47:27
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 22:25, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 2:23=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be ti=
red, right? no
> > > > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, righ=
t? no
> > > > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to=
be tired now
> > > > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world=
, now he is
> > > > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his=
fans are
> > > > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > > > What is going on?
>
> > > > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how t=
o
> > > > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's mat=
ch
> > > > > with Tipex.
>
> > > > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > > > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in =
5
> > > > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > > > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > > > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > > > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> After playing Moya for 4 hours in some tournament early last year.
> Rafa, having about 20 hours to recover, lost about 0 and 1 to Youzhny
> the next day.
>
> Now he's coming off a 5 hour + match with about 40 hours to recover
> before playing a 3 out of 5 match against a guy who can run you silly.
> You really think it won't affect him?

Maybe it will, but the difference is this is a slam and he's got a
days rest.

I'll concede though that if Roger beats Rafa 0, 1 and 3 there was
probably some fatigue factoring into the scoreline, just not
convincing to me it be deciding the winner of the match ;)


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:41:03
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 4:36=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 3:37 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired=
, right? no
> >>>>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? =
no
> >>>>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be=
tired now
> >>>>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> >>>>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, n=
ow he is
> >>>>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fa=
ns are
> >>>>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
> >>>>>> What is going on?
> >>>>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> >>>>> take advantage of his fatigue.
> >>>>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> >>>>> with Tipex.
> >>>> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> >>>> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> >>>> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
> >>>> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> >>>> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> >>>> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> >>> Verdasco more easily.
> >> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> >> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> >> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> >> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> >> able to compete at the required level.
>
> > After playing Moya for 4 hours in some tournament early last year.
> > Rafa, having about 20 hours to recover, lost about 0 and 1 to Youzhny
> > the next day.
>
> > Now he's coming off a 5 hour + match with about 40 hours to recover
> > before playing a 3 out of 5 match against a guy who can run you silly.
> > You really think it won't affect him?
>
> That was Chennai. This is the Australian Open.
>
> 20 hours versus 40 hours also makes a big difference.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I think he'll be fine for a couple sets. If Rafa doesn't win both of
them he's going to be in trouble.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:52:53
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 4:36 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 30, 3:37 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>>>>>>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>>>>>>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>>>>>>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>>>>>>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>>>>>>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>>>>>>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>>>>>>> What is going on?
>>>>>>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
>>>>>>> take advantage of his fatigue.
>>>>>>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
>>>>>>> with Tipex.
>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
>>>>>> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
>>>>>> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>>>>>> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
>>>>>> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
>>>>>> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
>>>>> Verdasco more easily.
>>>> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
>>>> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
>>>> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
>>>> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
>>>> able to compete at the required level.
>>> After playing Moya for 4 hours in some tournament early last year.
>>> Rafa, having about 20 hours to recover, lost about 0 and 1 to Youzhny
>>> the next day.
>>> Now he's coming off a 5 hour + match with about 40 hours to recover
>>> before playing a 3 out of 5 match against a guy who can run you silly.
>>> You really think it won't affect him?
>> That was Chennai. This is the Australian Open.
>>
>> 20 hours versus 40 hours also makes a big difference.
>>
>
> I think he'll be fine for a couple sets. If Rafa doesn't win both of
> them he's going to be in trouble.

How will he be if he wins both of them?

Any one who is down 2 sets to 0 in a slam final is in big trouble, methinks.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:39:33
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 4:28=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 jan, 22:18, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 4:14=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 30 jan, 21:41, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to b=
eat
> > > > > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > > > > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is h=
e's
> > > > > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federe=
r, at
> > > > > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to ha=
nd
> > > > > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 shoul=
d be
> > > > > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 hou=
rs,
> > > > unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
> > > > ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.
>
> > > Maybe Fed uses more energy to speed up the game and Nadal gives
> > > himself more time to relax between points, =A0retreating far behind t=
he
> > > baseline to set up the counter. A certain style using up more time,
> > > doesn't necessarily mean it's more draining than the other.
>
> > > You could say Fed is more like the 100m sprinter and Nadal the 500m
> > > distance runner. Both will give it their all to finish first and
> > > should therefore be similarly spent crossing the finish line. They
> > > just distribute their energy differently.
>
> > > > At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I ho=
pe
> > > > you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
> > > > pro- or anti-Fed
>
> > > I'm not, since I know you're pro-the-guy-who's-record-is-on-the-line
> > > Sampras :D
>
> > I'm not sure what you're wanting to read from me. No excuses for Rafa.
> > Full credit if Fed wins.
>
> I don't want to read anything, really. Just discussing with you since
> imo you generally make good arguments. Fortunately, I don't agree with
> all of them, besides that would kill the discussion and where's the
> fun in that.
>
> BTW I liked Sampras and his game in particular very much. Now I like
> his record to be equalled. :D-

I'm pretty sure you're going to enjoy Sunday's final :)


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:28:40
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 22:18, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 4:14=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 30 jan, 21:41, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to bea=
t
> > > > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > > > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he'=
s
> > > > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer,=
at
> > > > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> > > > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should =
be
> > > > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 hours=
,
> > > unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
> > > ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.
>
> > Maybe Fed uses more energy to speed up the game and Nadal gives
> > himself more time to relax between points, =A0retreating far behind the
> > baseline to set up the counter. A certain style using up more time,
> > doesn't necessarily mean it's more draining than the other.
>
> > You could say Fed is more like the 100m sprinter and Nadal the 500m
> > distance runner. Both will give it their all to finish first and
> > should therefore be similarly spent crossing the finish line. They
> > just distribute their energy differently.
>
> > > At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I hope
> > > you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
> > > pro- or anti-Fed
>
> > I'm not, since I know you're pro-the-guy-who's-record-is-on-the-line
> > Sampras :D
>
> I'm not sure what you're wanting to read from me. No excuses for Rafa.
> Full credit if Fed wins.

I don't want to read anything, really. Just discussing with you since
imo you generally make good arguments. Fortunately, I don't agree with
all of them, besides that would kill the discussion and where's the
fun in that.

BTW I liked Sampras and his game in particular very much. Now I like
his record to be equalled. :D


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:25:01
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 2:23=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tire=
d, right? no
> > > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right?=
no
> > > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to b=
e tired now
> > > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, =
now he is
> > > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his f=
ans are
> > > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > > What is going on?
>
> > > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > > > with Tipex.
>
> > > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> > > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > Verdasco more easily.
>
> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

After playing Moya for 4 hours in some tournament early last year.
Rafa, having about 20 hours to recover, lost about 0 and 1 to Youzhny
the next day.

Now he's coming off a 5 hour + match with about 40 hours to recover
before playing a 3 out of 5 match against a guy who can run you silly.
You really think it won't affect him?


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:36:06
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:37 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>>>>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>>>>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>>>>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>>>>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>>>>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>>>>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>>>>> What is going on?
>>>>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
>>>>> take advantage of his fatigue.
>>>>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
>>>>> with Tipex.
>>>> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
>>>> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
>>>> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>>>> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
>>>> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
>>>> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
>>> Verdasco more easily.
>> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
>> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
>> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
>> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
>> able to compete at the required level.
>
> After playing Moya for 4 hours in some tournament early last year.
> Rafa, having about 20 hours to recover, lost about 0 and 1 to Youzhny
> the next day.
>
> Now he's coming off a 5 hour + match with about 40 hours to recover
> before playing a 3 out of 5 match against a guy who can run you silly.
> You really think it won't affect him?

That was Chennai. This is the Australian Open.

20 hours versus 40 hours also makes a big difference.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:18:01
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 4:14=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 jan, 21:41, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> > > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, a=
t
> > > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> > > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> > > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 hours,
> > unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
> > ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.
>
> Maybe Fed uses more energy to speed up the game and Nadal gives
> himself more time to relax between points, =A0retreating far behind the
> baseline to set up the counter. A certain style using up more time,
> doesn't necessarily mean it's more draining than the other.
>
> You could say Fed is more like the 100m sprinter and Nadal the 500m
> distance runner. Both will give it their all to finish first and
> should therefore be similarly spent crossing the finish line. They
> just distribute their energy differently.
>
> > At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I hope
> > you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
> > pro- or anti-Fed
>
> I'm not, since I know you're pro-the-guy-who's-record-is-on-the-line
> Sampras :D

I'm not sure what you're wanting to read from me. No excuses for Rafa.
Full credit if Fed wins.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:17:23
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 22:51, "*skriptis" <skrip...@post.t-com.hr > wrote:
> "kaennorsing" <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:990f4e37-fca0-41a1-a769-37d67d921e15@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired,
> > > > > right? no
> > > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> > > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be
> > > > > tired now
> > > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now
> > > > > he is
> > > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans
> > > > > are
> > > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > > What is going on?
>
> > > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > > > with Tipex.
>
> > > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> > > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > Verdasco more easily.
>
> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> able to compete at the required level.
>
> ***
>
> Comparing Del Potro with Federer?
> Way to go clown.

Learn to comprehend, come back after.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:14:53
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 21:41, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > > Verdasco more easily.
>
> > That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> > got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> > 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> > Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> > able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 hours,
> unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
> ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.

Maybe Fed uses more energy to speed up the game and Nadal gives
himself more time to relax between points, retreating far behind the
baseline to set up the counter. A certain style using up more time,
doesn't necessarily mean it's more draining than the other.

You could say Fed is more like the 100m sprinter and Nadal the 500m
distance runner. Both will give it their all to finish first and
should therefore be similarly spent crossing the finish line. They
just distribute their energy differently.

> At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I hope
> you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
> pro- or anti-Fed

I'm not, since I know you're pro-the-guy-who's-record-is-on-the-line
Sampras :D


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:14:52
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 4:06=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 3:53 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 31, 2:46 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> >>>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the f=
inal.
> >>>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an a=
ge
> >>>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
> >>> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> >>> against Hewitt and Safin?
> >> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
> >> Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>
> > That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
> > is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
> > this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
> > at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.
>
> Federer's best was between 2004 and 2006, IMO.
>
> His 2008 was abysmal in comparison. Are you claiming that 2008
> represents Federer at peak? We are now in January 2009.

No, but he is close enough to peak that he should be able to take
advantage of Rafa's fatigue and win
Sunday's final. I'm pretty sure he will.

I've just read too many threads on this ng saying Pete (age 30 and 31)
was at peak in 2000 and 2001 USOs, so hearing that Fed is not at peak
at age 27 caught my attention.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:31:14
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 4:06 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 30, 3:53 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 31, 2:46 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
>>>>>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>>>>>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
>>>>>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>>>>> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
>>>>> against Hewitt and Safin?
>>>> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
>>>> Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>>> That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
>>> is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
>>> this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
>>> at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.
>> Federer's best was between 2004 and 2006, IMO.
>>
>> His 2008 was abysmal in comparison. Are you claiming that 2008
>> represents Federer at peak? We are now in January 2009.
>
> No, but he is close enough to peak that he should be able to take
> advantage of Rafa's fatigue and win
> Sunday's final. I'm pretty sure he will.
>
> I've just read too many threads on this ng saying Pete (age 30 and 31)
> was at peak in 2000 and 2001 USOs, so hearing that Fed is not at peak
> at age 27 caught my attention.

Age 29 and 30?

As an experienced champ playing first time slam finalists, Sampras was
the favorite both times.

Safin overpowered Sampras, IIRC. Maybe I should watch that match again.

In any case, if a certain Sampras-fanatic goes away from rst and stops
bombarding rst with a gazillion canards a quarter, there won't be a
single post claiming Sampras was at his peak at his advanced age.

Sampras did have his most consistent spell at the US Open as he was
waning. Read of that what you will, but it was surely a sign of greatness.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:11:49
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 4:05=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 31, 3:01=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 3:53=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 31, 2:46=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 30, 3:22=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrot=
e:
>
> > > > > I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> > > > > game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in th=
e final.
>
> > > > > Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at a=
n age
> > > > > that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> > > > So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> > > > against Hewitt and Safin?
>
> > > Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
> > > Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>
> > That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
> > is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
> > this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
> > at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.
>
> Well, in my view, Sampras was not at his peak in the 2000 and 2001
> USOs. And Federer is not at his peak now either, but closer to it than
> Sampras was in 2000-2001 to his own peak.

Eminently reasonable post.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 23:54:33
From: TT
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 4:05 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 31, 3:01 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 30, 3:53 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 31, 2:46 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
>>>>>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>>>>>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
>>>>>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>>>>> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
>>>>> against Hewitt and Safin?
>>>> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
>>>> Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>>> That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
>>> is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
>>> this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
>>> at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.
>> Well, in my view, Sampras was not at his peak in the 2000 and 2001
>> USOs. And Federer is not at his peak now either, but closer to it than
>> Sampras was in 2000-2001 to his own peak.
>
> Eminently reasonable post.

RST never understood difference between "prime" and "peak".

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:05:46
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 31, 3:01=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:53=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 31, 2:46=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 3:22=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> > > > game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the =
final.
>
> > > > Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an =
age
> > > > that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> > > So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> > > against Hewitt and Safin?
>
> > Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
> > Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>
> That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
> is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
> this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
> at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.

Well, in my view, Sampras was not at his peak in the 2000 and 2001
USOs. And Federer is not at his peak now either, but closer to it than
Sampras was in 2000-2001 to his own peak. Are you trying to get
somewhere with this?



   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:24:30
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 31, 3:01 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 3:53 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 31, 2:46 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
>>>>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>>>>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
>>>>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>>>> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
>>>> against Hewitt and Safin?
>>> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
>>> Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>> That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
>> is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
>> this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
>> at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.
>
> Well, in my view, Sampras was not at his peak in the 2000 and 2001
> USOs. And Federer is not at his peak now either, but closer to it than
> Sampras was in 2000-2001 to his own peak. Are you trying to get
> somewhere with this?
>

Sampras was 29 and 30, wasn't he? Are we all *skripteasing now?

Safin was just ridiculous that day and might have beaten Sampras anyway.
Of course Sampras wasn't at his peak when he faced Hewitt. What manner
of silliness is it to wonder if he was? His serve was still peak though
and he optimized his game around that and could still swing things in
his favor on fast surfaces.

Of course, 27 is not ancient and Federer does appear well-preserved. But
his play has been much more iffy than it was 3 years ago. That is
undeniable as well.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:05:22
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:57=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:

> Sampras was clearly at his US Open peak in those matches. 3 finals in a
> row, isn't it? Did he ever do that before?

And Fed won the last Slam that was played.

What kind of Fed fan are you? Just say, bring it on Rafa! Fed's gonna
kick your ass in straight sets.

I know you have it in you ;-)


> Agassi is harder to gauge. That was his last hurrah, I believe. Even
> then, that was just sheer will power and cussedness that he wouldn't
> lose before the final.
>
> Federer is coming off his worst year by far in a long time. He is still
> patchy though with some flashes of brilliance.
>
> Nadal is clearly at his best so far in his career.
>
> What can I do if Federer was just phenomenal 3 or 4 years ago? Don't
> shoot the messenger.

Sure he was at absolute peak in 2006. But he's also a goat candidate
who made 3 Slam finals
last year and won the very last Slam that was played.

Face it, he's an 8-time hard Court Slam champ playing a player coming
off a 5 hour + match.

There's no excuse for him losing this match.

I'm very confident he'll win, but maybe I'm not as emotional about my
analysis as you are?



   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:17:54
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:57 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>> Sampras was clearly at his US Open peak in those matches. 3 finals in a
>> row, isn't it? Did he ever do that before?
>
> And Fed won the last Slam that was played.
>
> What kind of Fed fan are you? Just say, bring it on Rafa! Fed's gonna
> kick your ass in straight sets.
>
> I know you have it in you ;-)
>

Really? Not my style, I must say. But you may know me better than I do
myself.

>
>> Agassi is harder to gauge. That was his last hurrah, I believe. Even
>> then, that was just sheer will power and cussedness that he wouldn't
>> lose before the final.
>>
>> Federer is coming off his worst year by far in a long time. He is still
>> patchy though with some flashes of brilliance.
>>
>> Nadal is clearly at his best so far in his career.
>>
>> What can I do if Federer was just phenomenal 3 or 4 years ago? Don't
>> shoot the messenger.
>
> Sure he was at absolute peak in 2006. But he's also a goat candidate
> who made 3 Slam finals
> last year and won the very last Slam that was played.
>
> Face it, he's an 8-time hard Court Slam champ playing a player coming
> off a 5 hour + match.
>

True. But it is the indestructible Nadal, who is a clear #1 after a
fabulous 2008, the man who can run for 5 hours and be ready to run some
more.

> There's no excuse for him losing this match.
>
> I'm very confident he'll win, but maybe I'm not as emotional about my
> analysis as you are?
>

Federer wins it easy on paper.

But it a lot depends on the form of the day. If the Federer who played
Berdych shows up for the first hour and a half, I think it could be a
very steep uphill road against Nadal.

Throw in the pressure of the 14th slam and nerves can play a big role.
The 14th slam is a big deal given the steady build up to the slam count
that Sampras cultivated as he assaulted and conquered the mountain.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 13:01:50
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:53=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2:46=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jan 30, 3:22=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> > > game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the fi=
nal.
>
> > > Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an ag=
e
> > > that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> > So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> > against Hewitt and Safin?
>
> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
> Federer, daylight, Sampras.

That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 21:06:09
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:53 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 31, 2:46 am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
>>>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>>>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
>>>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>>> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
>>> against Hewitt and Safin?
>> Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
>> Federer, daylight, Sampras.
>
> That's not an answer to my question. I want to know how Fed at age 27
> is 3 years *beyond his best* (I know
> this is Vari's comment, not yours), while Sampras at age 30 and 31 was
> at peak when playing those finals against Hewitt and Safin.

Federer's best was between 2004 and 2006, IMO.

His 2008 was abysmal in comparison. Are you claiming that 2008
represents Federer at peak? We are now in January 2009.

Let me know!

I am not sure why you are trying to inject Sampras into this. Must
Sampras be part of every thread?

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:53:52
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 31, 2:46=A0am, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:22=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> > game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the fina=
l.
>
> > Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
> > that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> against Hewitt and Safin?
>

Federer best far eclipses Sampras's best in terms of achievement.
Federer, daylight, Sampras.

> How many years was Agassi *beyond his best* at the 05 USO final?

Agassi was way past his best as far as movement and general
athleticism, but his shotmaking was at its finest, honed to
perfection. Hardly made unforced errors.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:46:16
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:22=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:

>
> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>
> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.

So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
against Hewitt and Safin?

How many years was Agassi *beyond his best* at the 05 USO final?


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 22:52:53
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue

<jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:496fb76b-5115-44d1-ae07-ede663f039cd@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:

>
> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>
> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.

So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
against Hewitt and Safin?

How many years was Agassi *beyond his best* at the 05 USO final?


***

Sampras 7 years, Agassi 10.

Vari is clearly a serious Fedfucker, saying Fed was at peak at AO 06.
When in fact, ranking-wise, and performance-wise it was YEC 06-AO 07.






   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 20:57:32
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 3:22 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
>> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>>
>> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
>> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> So how many years was Sampras *beyond his best* in those USO finals
> against Hewitt and Safin?
>
> How many years was Agassi *beyond his best* at the 05 USO final?

Sampras was clearly at his US Open peak in those matches. 3 finals in a
row, isn't it? Did he ever do that before?

You happy now? :-P

Agassi is harder to gauge. That was his last hurrah, I believe. Even
then, that was just sheer will power and cussedness that he wouldn't
lose before the final.

Federer is coming off his worst year by far in a long time. He is still
patchy though with some flashes of brilliance.

Nadal is clearly at his best so far in his career.

What can I do if Federer was just phenomenal 3 or 4 years ago? Don't
shoot the messenger.

--
Cheers,

vc


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:41:19
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:37=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 2:23=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tire=
d, right? no
> > > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right?=
no
> > > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to b=
e tired now
> > > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, =
now he is
> > > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his f=
ans are
> > > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > > What is going on?
>
> > > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > > > with Tipex.
>
> > > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> > > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> > Verdasco more easily.
>
> That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
> got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
> 27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
> Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
> able to compete at the required level.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah but not all 5-setters are equal. Fed's five setters take 4 hours,
unless they're 14-12 in the fifth. Nadal's take 5 and involve
ridiculous scrambling, that's a big difference.

At the end of the day whoever wins the title gets full credit. I hope
you're not reading this and gauging whether I'm
pro- or anti-Fed

Rst doesn't have to be "Crossfire"


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:37:53
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:23=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired,=
right? no
> > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? n=
o
> > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be =
tired now
> > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, no=
w he is
> > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fan=
s are
> > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > What is going on?
>
> > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > > with Tipex.
>
> > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> Verdasco more easily.

That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
able to compete at the required level.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 22:51:00
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue

"kaennorsing" <ljubitsis@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:990f4e37-fca0-41a1-a769-37d67d921e15@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 30 jan, 21:06, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired,
> > > > right? no
> > > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> > > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be
> > > > tired now
> > > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now
> > > > he is
> > > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans
> > > > are
> > > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > > What is going on?
>
> > > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > > with Tipex.
>
> > Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> > setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> > sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> > I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> > days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> > fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> Verdasco more easily.

That's not the reason there shouldn't be excuses. The reason is he's
got a days rest and is young enough to recover in time. If Federer, at
27 (28 in #skripting :) can recover in time from a 5 setter to hand
Del Potro the most handsomest of thrashings, Nadal at 22/23 should be
able to compete at the required level.

***

Comparing Del Potro with Federer?
Way to go clown.




  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:37:51
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 3:35=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote in messagenews:RjJgl.32756=
2$Mh5.296691@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> > =A0I would expect Federer to be at his most nervous in this match with =
so
> > much legacy at stake against the one player whose consistent play and
> > speedy defense make it a bad match-up for him.
>
> > We are talking about two great champions here. They will surely leave i=
t
> > all on =A0court.
>
> I think Federer lacked confidence last year because of his sickness and h=
ow
> it affected his training and preparation.
> He looks confident now but you might be right, he may show up shaky.
> I think the start of the match will be critical for Federer. Federer was
> broken in the first set in Wimbledon and had like 100 break points, none =
was
> converted. In the 2nd set, he broke first and instead of closing the set,=
he
> ended up losing it.
> Nadal knows how to take advantage of him. The same thing happened on clay=
in
> MC and Hamburg last year.

I think it's critical that Nadal win the first set. As tough as he is,
that will be a heavy blow
if he gets down early under the circumstances.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 12:06:20
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 2:23=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired, r=
ight? no
> > > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> > > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be ti=
red now
> > > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now =
he is
> > > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans =
are
> > > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > > What is going on?
>
> > The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> > take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> > Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> > with Tipex.
>
> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
Verdasco more easily.

He didn't, so there's no grounds for taking anything away from a Fed
victory, if that's the outcome.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 20:22:09
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>>> What is going on?
>>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
>>> take advantage of his fatigue.
>>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
>>> with Tipex.
>> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
>> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
>> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>>
>> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
>> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
>> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
> Verdasco more easily.
>
> He didn't, so there's no grounds for taking anything away from a Fed
> victory, if that's the outcome.

Never mind the self-inflicted pain and suffering, he still gets to play
on Friday and Sunday with a full day of rest in between.

I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.

Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.

Didn't the naysayers already ring the death bells for Federer after
Wimbledon? Ringing out the #1 when he has just lost on his favorite turf
is one thing.

Here it would be #1 beating #2 over whom he has a 3000 point lead. Much
more ho hum than if the reverse result is reached.

If they play as they both can on this surface, I expect Federer to win.
But form and fitness mean nothing when a tying 14th slam is at play. I
would expect Federer to be at his most nervous in this match with so
much legacy at stake against the one player whose consistent play and
speedy defense make it a bad match-up for him.

We are talking about two great champions here. They will surely leave it
all on court.

--
Cheers,

vc


    
Date: 31 Jan 2009 11:18:48
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
Vari L. Cinicke wrote:
> jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 2:23 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired,
>>>>> right? no
>>>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>>>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be
>>>>> tired now
>>>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>>>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world,
>>>>> now he is
>>>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his
>>>>> fans are
>>>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>>>> What is going on?
>>>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
>>>> take advantage of his fatigue.
>>>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
>>>> with Tipex.
>>> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
>>> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
>>> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>>>
>>> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
>>> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
>>> fittest - player on tour.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Well, there's no excuse because Nadal needed to find a way to beat
>> Verdasco more easily.
>>
>> He didn't, so there's no grounds for taking anything away from a Fed
>> victory, if that's the outcome.
>
> Never mind the self-inflicted pain and suffering, he still gets to play
> on Friday and Sunday with a full day of rest in between.
>
> I expect Nadal, the #1 playing at his peak (physical, mental,
> game-wise), to be ready and willing to strut his best stuff in the final.
>
> Federer, though clearly beyond his best by about 3 years and at an age
> that could be a concern, will also be primed for the final.
>
> Didn't the naysayers already ring the death bells for Federer after
> Wimbledon? Ringing out the #1 when he has just lost on his favorite turf
> is one thing.
>
> Here it would be #1 beating #2 over whom he has a 3000 point lead. Much
> more ho hum than if the reverse result is reached.
>
> If they play as they both can on this surface, I expect Federer to win.
> But form and fitness mean nothing when a tying 14th slam is at play. I
> would expect Federer to be at his most nervous in this match with so
> much legacy at stake against the one player whose consistent play and
> speedy defense make it a bad match-up for him.
>
> We are talking about two great champions here. They will surely leave it
> all on court.
>


Good post.



    
Date: 30 Jan 2009 15:35:38
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue

"Vari L. Cinicke" <cinicke@netscape.net > wrote in message
news:RjJgl.327562$Mh5.296691@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I would expect Federer to be at his most nervous in this match with so
> much legacy at stake against the one player whose consistent play and
> speedy defense make it a bad match-up for him.
>
> We are talking about two great champions here. They will surely leave it
> all on court.


I think Federer lacked confidence last year because of his sickness and how
it affected his training and preparation.
He looks confident now but you might be right, he may show up shaky.
I think the start of the match will be critical for Federer. Federer was
broken in the first set in Wimbledon and had like 100 break points, none was
converted. In the 2nd set, he broke first and instead of closing the set, he
ended up losing it.
Nadal knows how to take advantage of him. The same thing happened on clay in
MC and Hamburg last year.




  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 11:23:33
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired, rig=
ht? no
> > He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> > He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tire=
d now
> > and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> > He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he=
is
> > tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans ar=
e
> > saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> > What is going on?
>
> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> with Tipex.

Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.

I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
fittest - player on tour.


   
Date: 31 Jan 2009 11:11:46
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 30 jan, 19:47, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>> What is going on?
>> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
>> take advantage of his fatigue.
>>
>> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
>> with Tipex.
>
> Federer beat Berdych - ranked 13 - in straight sets after that 5
> setter with Tipsy. This year when he beat Berdych - ranked 20 - in 5
> sets he came back to annihilated Del Potro, ranked 6.
>
> I'm just saying there should be no excuses. In slams players get a
> days rest. Besides, Nadal is only 22 and one of the - if not *the*
> fittest - player on tour.


Still, longest ever match in AO history. He's not likely to be at his
best but should be too good for Roger.



  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 18:55:11
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>
>> What is going on?
>
> The difference is he's up against an opponent who will know how to
> take advantage of his fatigue.
>
> Fed wouldn't have wanted to face Rafa right after last year's match
> with Tipex.

Nadal is usually extra ready for Federer since his defensive genius
matches up particularly well with Federer's offensive genius.

What a pair at the top of the game!

Nadal is at his physical peak, isn't he? And at his career peak as far
as his game is concerned. (He may continue improving his game.) Federer
can't say either of those things these days.

Maybe Nadal will be feeling like a 27 year old in the final?

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 30 Jan 2009 10:45:28
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On 30 jan, 19:40, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired, right=
? no
> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired =
now
> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he i=
s
> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> What is going on?

It was Gonzo that beat Gasquet, but I get your point. Rafa fans are
just nervous for what=B4s gonna happen to him on Sunday. They know
Federer is in for revenge and this is a good a time as any.


 
Date: 30 Jan 2009 10:42:11
From:
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
On Jan 30, 1:40=A0pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, =A0should be tired, right=
? no
> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired =
now
> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he i=
s
> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>
> What is going on?

Verdasco looked a lot like Gonzo when he was beating Gasquet ;-)


  
Date: 31 Jan 2009 11:04:38
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue
jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 30, 1:40 pm, "wkhedr" <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> Verdasco played long five sets to beat Gasquet, should be tired, right? no
>> He came back to beat Murray in five sets, now he is tired, right? no
>> He came back to beat Tsonga in four sets, this is it, he has to be tired now
>> and will be eaten by the fresh cruising Nadal, right? no
>> He plays five hours and almost beats the #1 player in the world, now he is
>> tired, right? no Nadal is the one that got tired and he and his fans are
>> saying having almost two days to rest is not enough.
>>
>> What is going on?
>
> Verdasco looked a lot like Gonzo when he was beating Gasquet ;-)


Best not to engage the bottomfeeder analysts.



  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 19:44:00
From: Aimless
Subject: Re: Fatigue, fatigue, fatigue

<jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com > wrote in message

>Verdasco looked a lot like Gonzo when he was beating Gasquet ;-)

He does have a point