tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 29 Jan 2009 08:23:43
From: NB
Subject: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
Nadal matchups on hard courts?




 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 19:09:42
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 6:06=A0pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:56=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 29, 4:40=A0pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 29, 4:37=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > > Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is=
slow
> > > > nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successf=
ul
> > > > grass career?
> > > > Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?
>
> > > > It's sour grapes really.
>
> > > That's a fair point. I don't recall anyone complaining about Wimby
> > > being slow back in 2004 or 2005.
>
> > By "anyone," do you mean no one in RST, or no tennis players? Either
> > way, I would not trust mere memory on this point (as I keep saying,
> > the fact that a person doesn't remember something doesn't mean it
> > didn't occur). As to players, however, here's an example from 2002:http=
://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/wimbledon/2088800.stm
>
> > As to RST complaints by "Federer fanboys," I don't care enough to look
> > up something like that, given the general difficulty of proving a
> > negative. All that counts for me is whether current conditions at a
> > tournament make for good tennis without introducing wild deviations
> > from well-established norms, and people can have differing opinions
> > about Wimbledon. Whether hypocrisy or "sour grapes" is involved in
> > this type of criticism is of little interest. Those issues never get
> > sorted out.
>
> > Joe Ramirez
>
> Yes, I am referring to rst. I think Fed fans generally were happy with
> the court speed
> until Roger started struggling more and more with Nadal on that
> surface.
>
> Just a hunch. I'm sure neither one of us wants to go searching through
> the archives to find examples.
>
> Since you've been around this place longer than I have and are one of
> the most fair-minded people here, what
> do you think? Do you recall comments in 2005 like "Wimbledon needs to
> speed up the courts. We're losing the
> special characteristics of the different tournaments."

No, not specifically -- though my nonrecollection means little. I'm
pretty sure there was discussion about the lack of s&v and reliance on
baseline play, however, starting with Hewitt-Nalbandian in 2002, and
including Fed's finals in 2004 and after (maybe not 2003). Ironically,
this means that Whisper was one of the RSTers most likely to have
complained about court speed, since we all know that "bumrooter" play
is anathema to him. But whether his and other complaints about
baseline tennis partially blamed the courts for encouraging that
strategy, or whether the players themselves were held solely
responsible, I can't say without research.

> Because I definitely do recall a few threads after last year's
> Wimbledon with those very arguments.

Yes, I recall them as well. And they may be right -- though I agree
that it's not enough to base such complaints on 2008 alone. You have
to look at all the results since the grass was changed in 2001 (though
the first truly slow year was 2002, as I've posted elsewhen).

Joe Ramirez
>
> - Show quoted text -



 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 15:06:24
From:
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 4:56=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:40=A0pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jan 29, 4:37=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is s=
low
> > > nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successful
> > > grass career?
> > > Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?
>
> > > It's sour grapes really.
>
> > That's a fair point. I don't recall anyone complaining about Wimby
> > being slow back in 2004 or 2005.
>
> By "anyone," do you mean no one in RST, or no tennis players? Either
> way, I would not trust mere memory on this point (as I keep saying,
> the fact that a person doesn't remember something doesn't mean it
> didn't occur). As to players, however, here's an example from 2002:http:/=
/news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/wimbledon/2088800.stm
>
> As to RST complaints by "Federer fanboys," I don't care enough to look
> up something like that, given the general difficulty of proving a
> negative. All that counts for me is whether current conditions at a
> tournament make for good tennis without introducing wild deviations
> from well-established norms, and people can have differing opinions
> about Wimbledon. Whether hypocrisy or "sour grapes" is involved in
> this type of criticism is of little interest. Those issues never get
> sorted out.
>
> Joe Ramirez

Yes, I am referring to rst. I think Fed fans generally were happy with
the court speed
until Roger started struggling more and more with Nadal on that
surface.

Just a hunch. I'm sure neither one of us wants to go searching through
the archives to find examples.

Since you've been around this place longer than I have and are one of
the most fair-minded people here, what
do you think? Do you recall comments in 2005 like "Wimbledon needs to
speed up the courts. We're losing the
special characteristics of the different tournaments."

Because I definitely do recall a few threads after last year's
Wimbledon with those very arguments.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 02:27:58
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final

<jasoncatlin1971@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:81364f9f-8a51-41e1-914f-70bd290ff375@a12g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 4:56 pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:40 pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jan 29, 4:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is
> > > slow
> > > nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successful
> > > grass career?
> > > Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?
>
> > > It's sour grapes really.
>
> > That's a fair point. I don't recall anyone complaining about Wimby
> > being slow back in 2004 or 2005.
>
> By "anyone," do you mean no one in RST, or no tennis players? Either
> way, I would not trust mere memory on this point (as I keep saying,
> the fact that a person doesn't remember something doesn't mean it
> didn't occur). As to players, however, here's an example from
> 2002:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/wimbledon/2088800.stm
>
> As to RST complaints by "Federer fanboys," I don't care enough to look
> up something like that, given the general difficulty of proving a
> negative. All that counts for me is whether current conditions at a
> tournament make for good tennis without introducing wild deviations
> from well-established norms, and people can have differing opinions
> about Wimbledon. Whether hypocrisy or "sour grapes" is involved in
> this type of criticism is of little interest. Those issues never get
> sorted out.
>
> Joe Ramirez

Yes, I am referring to rst. I think Fed fans generally were happy with
the court speed
until Roger started struggling more and more with Nadal on that
surface.

Just a hunch. I'm sure neither one of us wants to go searching through
the archives to find examples.

Since you've been around this place longer than I have and are one of
the most fair-minded people here, what
do you think? Do you recall comments in 2005 like "Wimbledon needs to
speed up the courts. We're losing the
special characteristics of the different tournaments."

Because I definitely do recall a few threads after last year's
Wimbledon with those very arguments.

***

I know it was said that post 2001 surface was changed and it affeceted
spead. Was it true, I don't know.
Beyond that, nobody said every year that "surface was slower than the last
year", only maybe "slower in general" terms, compared to Sampras' era, pre
2001.
However that could be pure ceiebs, as most player lacked volleying skils.

Beyond that, the courts are usually affected by (lack of) rain. But those
changes are not so crucial.

So..yes, Nadal beat Federer in 08 and played finals 06-07 on those courts
who were basically identical for the past 7-8 years and on which Federer won
5 titles.





 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 14:04:58
From:
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 8:06=A0pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2:50=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > Petter Solbu wrote:
> > > > kaennorsing wrote:
>
> > > >> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the A=
O
> > > >> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miam=
i.
>
> > > > Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> > > > right now? USO?
>
> > > > PS.
>
> > >http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=3D207765
>
> > That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
> > serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
> > than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
> > posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
> > playing field.
>
> This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
> speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
> 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
> faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
> lunging for a return.
> 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
> 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
> of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
> than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
> highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
> actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>
> Also, one should hestitate about drawing conclusions from percentage
> differences in the table that may not be statistically significant,
> even if the order of the tournaments appears to coincide roughly with
> conventional wisdom.

More interestingly, if you hold that break percentage indicates court
speed, the stats seem to indicate that the Wimbledon courts have got
*faster* over the last ten years:

Wimbledon Breaking Percentage
1998 19.78%
2001 19.01%
2007 (Total) 17.34%
2008 16.77%

This flies in the face of anecdotal evidence from players plus
observations from some watchers ...







  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 00:15:49
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 8:06 pm, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 2:50 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>>>>> right now? USO?
>>>>> PS.
>>>> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>>> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
>>> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
>>> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
>>> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
>>> playing field.
>> This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
>> speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
>> 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
>> faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
>> lunging for a return.
>> 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
>> 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
>> of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
>> than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
>> highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
>> actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>>
>> Also, one should hestitate about drawing conclusions from percentage
>> differences in the table that may not be statistically significant,
>> even if the order of the tournaments appears to coincide roughly with
>> conventional wisdom.
>
> More interestingly, if you hold that break percentage indicates court
> speed, the stats seem to indicate that the Wimbledon courts have got
> *faster* over the last ten years:
>
> Wimbledon Breaking Percentage
> 1998 19.78%
> 2001 19.01%
> 2007 (Total) 17.34%
> 2008 16.77%
>
> This flies in the face of anecdotal evidence from players plus
> observations from some watchers ...
>
>


Yup. There must be an explanation but can't come up with one now. Rain?
Rackets? Karlovic? :)

What I find interesting too is Monte Carlo being on last/first
place...behind Hamburg even.
I have always thought that MC is faster than RG...If so, must be
something to do with field there or that it's first bigger clay
tournament of the season.




--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 23:40:09
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
TT wrote:

> Yup. There must be an explanation but can't come up with one now. Rain?
> Rackets? Karlovic? :)

Well, I guess you would agree that a lot of other things have changed in
tennis the last ten years, not only court speed. Now there is no doubt
that these changes also have an impact on break percentages. That is why
comparing break percentages over time on the same surface is misleading.
It is of course interesting of its own that break percentages at
Wimbledon is going down. The causes can be many, and I think you
understand that.

Comparing surfaces at the same point in time gives more meaning,
although it is not convincing enough. As Ramirez points out there are a
lot of other aspects of a surface that make it harder to break serve -
movement, bounces etc. If the direct link between break percentage and
court speed is so obvious, then I think the fact that AO surface has
almost the same break percentage as Roland Garros is really weird. It is
obvious that RG is way slower than AO. It could be other aspects with
the surface (apart from court speed) making it harder to return the ball
though at RG.

> What I find interesting too is Monte Carlo being on last/first
> place...behind Hamburg even.
> I have always thought that MC is faster than RG...If so, must be
> something to do with field there or that it's first bigger clay
> tournament of the season.

There you go. Do you think that is a more convincing argument than mine?

PS.


    
Date: 30 Jan 2009 00:55:51
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
Petter Solbu wrote:
> TT wrote:
>
>> Yup. There must be an explanation but can't come up with one now.
>> Rain? Rackets? Karlovic? :)
>
> Well, I guess you would agree that a lot of other things have changed in
> tennis the last ten years, not only court speed. Now there is no doubt
> that these changes also have an impact on break percentages. That is why
> comparing break percentages over time on the same surface is misleading.
> It is of course interesting of its own that break percentages at
> Wimbledon is going down. The causes can be many, and I think you
> understand that.
>
> Comparing surfaces at the same point in time gives more meaning,
> although it is not convincing enough. As Ramirez points out there are a
> lot of other aspects of a surface that make it harder to break serve -
> movement, bounces etc. If the direct link between break percentage and
> court speed is so obvious, then I think the fact that AO surface has
> almost the same break percentage as Roland Garros is really weird. It is
> obvious that RG is way slower than AO. It could be other aspects with
> the surface (apart from court speed) making it harder to return the ball
> though at RG.

Kick serves and uneven bounce make break% smaller than it should be in
relation to surface speed.

>
>> What I find interesting too is Monte Carlo being on last/first
>> place...behind Hamburg even.
>> I have always thought that MC is faster than RG...If so, must be
>> something to do with field there or that it's first bigger clay
>> tournament of the season.
>
> There you go. Do you think that is a more convincing argument than mine?
>
> PS.

Hey that was no argument, just fooling around with some ideas.



--
"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 00:15:29
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
TT wrote:

>>> What I find interesting too is Monte Carlo being on last/first
>>> place...behind Hamburg even.
>>> I have always thought that MC is faster than RG...If so, must be
>>> something to do with field there or that it's first bigger clay
>>> tournament of the season.
>>
>> There you go. Do you think that is a more convincing argument than mine?
>>
>> PS.
>
> Hey that was no argument, just fooling around with some ideas.

My argument is just that there a lot of elements in the game changing
over time that will have an impact on break percentage. Do you seriously
believe that court speed is the only thing that can affect break
percentage? Comparing break percentages across surfaces at the same
point in time avoids this issue because these factors are held constant.
But still you have movement, bouncing etc. which can have a huge impact.
My point is simply that we do not know. When observations, like AO being
as slow as RG, are completely interfering with intuition you need a
convincing argument to argue against that. Do you really mean that AO is
approximately as slow as RG? I don't remember that much about
differences between MC and RG, but I guess also clay courts can differ a
lot on several areas, not only court speed.

Look, I am not saying that Nadal is a horrible grass court player or
anything like that. I am just saying that the break percentage
statistics are not that convincing. The fact that several players and
commentators (and most of the spectators I guess) actually says the
court speed is slower now than 10 years ago should make you a little bit
uncertain about your belief in the explanatory power of the statistics.

PS.


      
Date: 30 Jan 2009 02:22:38
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final

"Petter Solbu" <pettermann1984@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:2tydnUZwg7gHpR_U4p2dnAA@telenor.com...
> TT wrote:
>
>>>> What I find interesting too is Monte Carlo being on last/first
>>>> place...behind Hamburg even.
>>>> I have always thought that MC is faster than RG...If so, must be
>>>> something to do with field there or that it's first bigger clay
>>>> tournament of the season.
>>>
>>> There you go. Do you think that is a more convincing argument than mine?
>>>
>>> PS.
>>
>> Hey that was no argument, just fooling around with some ideas.
>
> My argument is just that there a lot of elements in the game changing over
> time that will have an impact on break percentage. Do you seriously
> believe that court speed is the only thing that can affect break
> percentage? Comparing break percentages across surfaces at the same point
> in time avoids this issue because these factors are held constant. But
> still you have movement, bouncing etc. which can have a huge impact. My
> point is simply that we do not know. When observations, like AO being as
> slow as RG, are completely interfering with intuition you need a
> convincing argument to argue against that. Do you really mean that AO is
> approximately as slow as RG? I don't remember that much about differences
> between MC and RG, but I guess also clay courts can differ a lot on
> several areas, not only court speed.
>
> Look, I am not saying that Nadal is a horrible grass court player or
> anything like that. I am just saying that the break percentage statistics
> are not that convincing. The fact that several players and commentators
> (and most of the spectators I guess) actually says the court speed is
> slower now than 10 years ago should make you a little bit uncertain about
> your belief in the explanatory power of the statistics.
>
> PS.


But Federer didn't play (win) 10 years, and niether did Nadal.
The point is to discuss how slower grass affected Nadal and was that the
reason Federer lost.
If the speed was constant since 2003 then....




 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 13:56:09
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 4:40=A0pm, jasoncatlin1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:37=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is slo=
w
> > nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successful
> > grass career?
> > Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?
>
> > It's sour grapes really.
>
> That's a fair point. I don't recall anyone complaining about Wimby
> being slow back in 2004 or 2005.

By "anyone," do you mean no one in RST, or no tennis players? Either
way, I would not trust mere memory on this point (as I keep saying,
the fact that a person doesn't remember something doesn't mean it
didn't occur). As to players, however, here's an example from 2002:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/wimbledon/2088800.stm

As to RST complaints by "Federer fanboys," I don't care enough to look
up something like that, given the general difficulty of proving a
negative. All that counts for me is whether current conditions at a
tournament make for good tennis without introducing wild deviations
from well-established norms, and people can have differing opinions
about Wimbledon. Whether hypocrisy or "sour grapes" is involved in
this type of criticism is of little interest. Those issues never get
sorted out.

Joe Ramirez


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 13:40:30
From:
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 4:37=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:

>
> Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is slow
> nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successful
> grass career?
> Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?
>
> It's sour grapes really.

That's a fair point. I don't recall anyone complaining about Wimby
being slow back in 2004 or 2005.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 13:25:01
From: JTJ
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 11:23=A0am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for Fed/
> Nadal matchups on hard courts?

I know what their respective records in hard court slam finals is -
Federer 8-0, Nadal 0-0

This is Atraps! (I'm the bizzaro world TJT, baby!)


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 01:32:45
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:25:01 -0800 (PST), JTJ <dbrowne1234@gmail.com >
wrote:

>On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Never happened in a major yet.  What is the overall record for Fed/
>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>
>I know what their respective records in hard court slam finals is -
>Federer 8-0, Nadal 0-0
>
>This is Atraps! (I'm the bizzaro world TJT, baby!)


well said.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 12:42:48
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 21:10, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> Petter Solbu wrote:
> >>> kaennorsing wrote:
> >>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> >>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
> >>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> >>> right now? USO?
> >>> PS.
> >>http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>
> > That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
> > serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
> > than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
> > posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
> > playing field.
>
> Correct.
> Top players get broken less, even against each other(or in other words
> they hold more easily)
>
> Also bounce at USO is more level than on grass. This makes grass a bit
> harder to break on.
>
> I do not buy grass=clay theory however. I trust statistics and my own
> eyes more.
> It seems that the order still is...carpet, grass, hc, clay

I just scrolled a little through the thread but there are no complete
stats for the entire calender of the last years, so no way to compare
or draw conclusions about court speeds.

There is however no doubt about the speed reduction of the courts at
Wimbledon. As a poster (daddy) on the board states;

"...during the Wimbledon graphics in the final, at least here, showed
the difference between same 200kph serve of the same player
( Federer ) arriving to returner at 42 kph while in 2008 while the
same type of serve by the same player in 2001 had 56 kph. That is a
clear difference of more than 20%. That alone shows that grass is
significantly slower now than in 2001 for example. I don't know why
people did not catch this as I posted in few threads during the finals
about it as I found the piece of info to be highly important."

I didn't need to see this clip to know it's true, but I did see it
live on air and it's quite obvious if you look back at matches from
just a few years ago.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 23:37:00
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 29 jan, 21:10, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>>>>> right now? USO?
>>>>> PS.
>>>> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>>> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
>>> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
>>> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
>>> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
>>> playing field.
>> Correct.
>> Top players get broken less, even against each other(or in other words
>> they hold more easily)
>>
>> Also bounce at USO is more level than on grass. This makes grass a bit
>> harder to break on.
>>
>> I do not buy grass=clay theory however. I trust statistics and my own
>> eyes more.
>> It seems that the order still is...carpet, grass, hc, clay
>
> I just scrolled a little through the thread but there are no complete
> stats for the entire calender of the last years, so no way to compare
> or draw conclusions about court speeds.

That doesn't make sense. Statistically there is enough data. If you
don't think so I guess you're free to count these statistics for last 10
years yourself.


>
> There is however no doubt about the speed reduction of the courts at
> Wimbledon. As a poster (daddy) on the board states;
>
> "...during the Wimbledon graphics in the final, at least here, showed
> the difference between same 200kph serve of the same player
> ( Federer ) arriving to returner at 42 kph while in 2008 while the
> same type of serve by the same player in 2001 had 56 kph. That is a
> clear difference of more than 20%. That alone shows that grass is
> significantly slower now than in 2001 for example. I don't know why
> people did not catch this as I posted in few threads during the finals
> about it as I found the piece of info to be highly important."
>
> I didn't need to see this clip to know it's true, but I did see it
> live on air and it's quite obvious if you look back at matches from
> just a few years ago.

You should read the whole thread before commenting, I'm sure someone
answered it there.

That graphic was total bullshit, yes total.

1. It's obvious that it was there for a purpose. Don't trust everything
with a computer graphic...or actually trust less everything with a
computer graphic.

2. Ball hit different spot on the court

3. Most importantly you can serve two serves with identical speed but
the other having massive spin, which appears very likely in this case.


Why is it that Federer fanboys are hellbent on saying that grass is slow
nowadays since Federer has played on same grass all of his successful
grass career?
Why was this not an issue when Federer won all those Wimbledon's?

It's sour grapes really.



--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 12:42:00
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 3:18=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Joe Ramirez wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 2:50 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> >>> Petter Solbu wrote:
> >>>> kaennorsing wrote:
> >>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> >>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami=
.
> >>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> >>>> right now? USO?
> >>>> PS.
> >>>http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=3D207765
> >> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
> >> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
> >> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
> >> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
> >> playing field.
>
> > This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
> > speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
> > 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
> > faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
> > lunging for a return.
>
> Yes. I don't think this plays a huge role.
>
> > 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
>
> And?

It's a confounding factor, that's all. A very low bounce =3D harder to
break serve, regardless of court speed. An extremely high bounce may
also cause difficulty. I wouldn't say bounce is as important as speed,
but I don't think it can be disregarded.

>
> > 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
> > of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
> > than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
> > highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
> > actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>
> This is tested. On later rounds at slams there are less breaks than on
> early rounds.

Yes, but because there are many more total matches in early rounds,
those rounds have greater impact on the tournament's overall break %.

This is my point. Suppose a small, five-round tournament is won by Joe
Blow, ranked outside the top 20. Say there are a total of x breaks in
his matches. What's the impact of replacing Joe Blow with Federer?
Well, Fed has a better serve, so he'll get broken less often -- say an
average reduction of one break per round. That means the total is now
x-5. But Fed's return of serve is not just better, but significantly
better than Joe Blow's, so he breaks his opponents more -- say an
average increase of two breaks per round. This means the net change in
total breaks is +5. And the percentage changes even more dramatically,
since more breaks typically means fewer games played. A one-break, 6-4
set has a 10% break rate; a two-break, 6-2 set has a 25% break rate.
Now, sprinkle some more Fed-level players throughout the draw, and see
what the effect is on the tournament's overall break %.

Joe Ramirez


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 23:21:47
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
Joe Ramirez wrote:
> On Jan 29, 3:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Joe Ramirez wrote:
>>> On Jan 29, 2:50 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>>>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>>>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>>>>>> right now? USO?
>>>>>> PS.
>>>>> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>>>> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
>>>> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
>>>> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
>>>> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
>>>> playing field.
>>> This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
>>> speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
>>> 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
>>> faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
>>> lunging for a return.
>> Yes. I don't think this plays a huge role.
>>
>>> 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
>> And?
>
> It's a confounding factor, that's all. A very low bounce = harder to
> break serve, regardless of court speed. An extremely high bounce may
> also cause difficulty. I wouldn't say bounce is as important as speed,
> but I don't think it can be disregarded.


There are also some statistics on ace counts which seem to support
figures seen in break%. Ace count would not be as liable to
bounce-factor as break percentage might be.


>
>>> 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
>>> of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
>>> than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
>>> highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
>>> actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>> This is tested. On later rounds at slams there are less breaks than on
>> early rounds.
>
> Yes, but because there are many more total matches in early rounds,
> those rounds have greater impact on the tournament's overall break %.

Yes. And since there are so many players seeded and some come through
qualies the level stays rather constant between draws of similar size.

However the draw size doesn't seem to effect much on the break%...clay
tournaments have still most breaks.


>
> This is my point. Suppose a small, five-round tournament is won by Joe
> Blow, ranked outside the top 20. Say there are a total of x breaks in
> his matches. What's the impact of replacing Joe Blow with Federer?
> Well, Fed has a better serve, so he'll get broken less often -- say an
> average reduction of one break per round. That means the total is now
> x-5. But Fed's return of serve is not just better, but significantly
> better than Joe Blow's, so he breaks his opponents more -- say an
> average increase of two breaks per round. This means the net change in
> total breaks is +5. And the percentage changes even more dramatically,
> since more breaks typically means fewer games played. A one-break, 6-4
> set has a 10% break rate; a two-break, 6-2 set has a 25% break rate.
> Now, sprinkle some more Fed-level players throughout the draw, and see
> what the effect is on the tournament's overall break %.
>
> Joe Ramirez


As I said the level of players in big tournaments is rather constant.
Not sure what you're after here...later rounds are statistically
irrelevant here.



--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 12:34:03
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 21:06, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2:50=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
> speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
> 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
> faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
> lunging for a return.
> 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
> 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
> of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
> than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
> highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
> actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>
> Also, one should hestitate about drawing conclusions from percentage
> differences in the table that may not be statistically significant,
> even if the order of the tournaments appears to coincide roughly with
> conventional wisdom.
>
> Joe Ramirez

True, it's clear there's more that makes up the difficulty of breaking
serve than the speed of the courts. I always assumed though that at
the highest levels the players know how to protect and hold their
serves better than at lower levels. Who knows how this actually works
out or if it's changed somewhat in the last decade or so, with more of
an emphasis on returning ability by the slowing conditions. Perhaps
there is some evidence somewhere to satisfy us.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 12:06:58
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 2:50=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > Petter Solbu wrote:
> > > kaennorsing wrote:
>
> > >> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> > >> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>
> > > Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> > > right now? USO?
>
> > > PS.
>
> >http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=3D207765
>
> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
> playing field.

This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
lunging for a return.
2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.
3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.

Also, one should hestitate about drawing conclusions from percentage
differences in the table that may not be statistically significant,
even if the order of the tournaments appears to coincide roughly with
conventional wisdom.

Joe Ramirez


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 22:18:38
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
Joe Ramirez wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2:50 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>>>> right now? USO?
>>>> PS.
>>> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
>> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
>> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
>> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
>> playing field.
>
> This probably should go without saying, but factors other than court
> speed influence the ease of breaking serve. E.g.:
> 1. Footing -- Even slower grass may be more difficult to break on than
> faster hard court, since the receiver may be more likely to slip while
> lunging for a return.

Yes. I don't think this plays a huge role.

> 2. Height of bounce -- Self-explanatory; different from court speed.

And?

> 3. Presence of top players -- IMO, the difference between the quality
> of the serves of highly ranked and lesser players is somewhat less
> than the difference between the quality of the service *returns* of
> highly ranked and lesser players. Ergo, having a better field may
> actually be conducive to breaks. This could be tested empirically.
>

This is tested. On later rounds at slams there are less breaks than on
early rounds.


> Also, one should hestitate about drawing conclusions from percentage
> differences in the table that may not be statistically significant,
> even if the order of the tournaments appears to coincide roughly with
> conventional wisdom.
>

Sample is sufficient in a slam. There are so many games played during
the tournament.


--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 11:50:38
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Petter Solbu wrote:
> > kaennorsing wrote:
>
> >> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> >> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>
> > Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> > right now? USO?
>
> > PS.
>
> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765

That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
playing field.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 22:10:46
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 29 jan, 20:37, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>>> right now? USO?
>>> PS.
>> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>
> That's an interesting thread. Quite surprising USO is easier to break
> serve than over half the other tournaments. It appears a lot faster
> than those stats indicate. Reasons could be the early rounds in slams
> posses more breaks since the draw's bigger and there's a less even
> playing field.

Correct.
Top players get broken less, even against each other(or in other words
they hold more easily)

Also bounce at USO is more level than on grass. This makes grass a bit
harder to break on.

I do not buy grass=clay theory however. I trust statistics and my own
eyes more.
It seems that the order still is...carpet, grass, hc, clay

--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 11:15:26
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 20:09, Petter Solbu <pettermann1...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> > anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>
> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> right now? USO?
>
> PS.

I thought Dubai was pretty slow, but it is some time ago I actually
watched it, so maybe I'm wrong :)

Anyway I'm pretty sure USO is indeed fastest these days.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 11:11:48
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 19:42, Javier Gonzalez <ja.gon....@gmmmmail.com > wrote:
> kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> >> > gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> > > On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> >> > >> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record fo=
r Fed/
> >> > >>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
> >> > >>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> >> > >>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is.=
The
> >> > >>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game an=
d with
> >> > >>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will be=
at
> >> > >>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nada=
l's
> >> > >>> consistency will decide the outcome.
> >> > >> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasc=
o).
> >> > >> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like=
peak
> >> > >> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at th=
e
> >> > >> moment.
>
> >> > > He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> >> > > Simon's awkward style
>
> >> > That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>
> >> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
> >> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
> >> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
> >> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>
> > Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> > sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> > that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> > plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>
> > Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
> > (indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
> > sets), YEC (indoors, straights)
>
> > This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.
>
> > The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
> > Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.
>
> But that's indoor YEC's fast court. I believe the type of HC at the AO is=
a
> bigger difference than indoor/outdoor.

Yes, I think it's a pretty fair court for both players. Still, Federer
is likely to prefer with the roof closed, if not for any other reason
than simple superstition.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 11:08:53
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 19:49, Petter Solbu <pettermann1...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> > sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> > that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> > plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>
> I also heard Federer saying that, but I cannot understand that this is
> valid for matches against Nadal. I am no expert on this, but to me it
> sounds obvious that Fed's shot making is more vulnerable to wind and
> difficult outdoor conditions than Nadal's spin. I am not sure whether
> the ball has more pace in indoor conditions, but my intuition says yes.
> If so, Federer should prefer roof closed.
>
> One thing is what Fed tells the media. What he actually thinks is a
> totally different matter. For example he keeps stressing at press
> conferences that he is so mentally strong. To me he is not even close to
> Nadal in this department. He has lost several of the encounters against
> him because of mental focus (some of the matches on clay last year
> especially).
>
> PS.

I think Federer's impressed with how mentally strong he has become
since he was as a teen.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 11:06:19
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 19:47, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> >>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for =
Fed/
> >>>>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
> >>>>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> >>>>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. T=
he
> >>>>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and =
with
> >>>>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> >>>>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal'=
s
> >>>>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
> >>>>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco)=
.
> >>>>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like p=
eak
> >>>>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
> >>>>> moment.
> >>>> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> >>>> Simon's awkward style
> >>> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
> >> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
> >> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
> >> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
> >> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>
> > Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> > sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> > that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> > plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>
> > Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
> > (indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
> > sets), YEC (indoors, straights)
>
> > This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.
>
> > The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
> > Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.
>
> Nadal plays better in the wind because of his bigger margins.
>
> Looking their h2h and who lost in or out could lead to wrong conclusion
> since indoors they play on synthetic and very fast surface.

Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 01:31:32
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:06:19 -0800 (PST), kaennorsing
<ljubitsis@hotmail.com > wrote:

>On 29 jan, 19:47, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>> > On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>> >>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> >>>> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Never happened in a major yet.  What is the overall record for Fed/
>> >>>>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>> >>>>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>> >>>>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>> >>>>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>> >>>>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>> >>>>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>> >>>>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>> >>>>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>> >>>>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>> >>>>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>> >>>>> moment.
>> >>>> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
>> >>>> Simon's awkward style
>> >>> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>> >> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
>> >> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
>> >> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
>> >> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>>
>> > Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
>> > sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
>> > that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
>> > plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>>
>> > Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
>> > (indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
>> > sets), YEC (indoors, straights)
>>
>> > This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.
>>
>> > The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
>> > Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.
>>
>> Nadal plays better in the wind because of his bigger margins.
>>
>> Looking their h2h and who lost in or out could lead to wrong conclusion
>> since indoors they play on synthetic and very fast surface.
>
>Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.


Dubai ? Isn't that where Youzhny beat Rafa 606060 last year ?


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 20:09:13
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing wrote:

> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.

Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
right now? USO?

PS.


   
Date: 29 Jan 2009 21:37:46
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
Petter Solbu wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
>
>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>
> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
> right now? USO?
>
> PS.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765

--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 22:32:26
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
TT wrote:
> Petter Solbu wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, not very fast in historical terms, but it's faster than the AO
>>> anyway. AO, in terms of speed, is probably more like Dubai or Miami.
>>
>> Dubai? I thought that was a lot faster. What is the fastest on tour
>> right now? USO?
>>
>> PS.
>
> http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=207765
>

Very interesting, I must say. But I think comparisons over time is a bit
tricky because so many elements of the game has changed. Different
racquets, different players with different styles of play, and so on.
But to look at different surfaces at the same point in time should be ok
though. Surprising that AO had almost the same break percentage as Rome
(clay) last year. And Wimbledon still has low break percentages compared
to other surfaces.

PS.


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 10:52:22
From:
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 12:59=A0pm, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for F=
ed/
> > >>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
> > >>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> > >>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. Th=
e
> > >>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and w=
ith
> > >>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> > >>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> > >>> consistency will decide the outcome.
> > >> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
> > >> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like pe=
ak
> > >> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
> > >> moment.
>
> > > He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> > > Simon's awkward style
>
> > That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>
> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
> with it closed.

Why is that? Because of the effect the elements have on the ball or
the surface?


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 10:39:07
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for F=
ed/
> > >>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
> > >>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> > >>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. Th=
e
> > >>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and w=
ith
> > >>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> > >>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> > >>> consistency will decide the outcome.
> > >> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
> > >> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like pe=
ak
> > >> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
> > >> moment.
>
> > > He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> > > Simon's awkward style
>
> > That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>
> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.

Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.

Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
(indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
sets), YEC (indoors, straights)

This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.

The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 15:42:03
From: Javier Gonzalez
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > > On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>> Never happened in a major yet.  What is the overall record for Fed/
>> > >>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>> > >>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>> > >>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>> > >>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>> > >>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>> > >>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>> > >>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>> > >> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>> > >> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>> > >> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>> > >> moment.
>>
>> > > He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
>> > > Simon's awkward style
>>
>> > That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>>
>> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
>> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
>> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
>> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>
> Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>
> Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
> (indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
> sets), YEC (indoors, straights)
>
> This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.
>
> The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
> Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.

But that's indoor YEC's fast court. I believe the type of HC at the AO is a
bigger difference than indoor/outdoor.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 19:49:57
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing wrote:

> Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.

I also heard Federer saying that, but I cannot understand that this is
valid for matches against Nadal. I am no expert on this, but to me it
sounds obvious that Fed's shot making is more vulnerable to wind and
difficult outdoor conditions than Nadal's spin. I am not sure whether
the ball has more pace in indoor conditions, but my intuition says yes.
If so, Federer should prefer roof closed.

One thing is what Fed tells the media. What he actually thinks is a
totally different matter. For example he keeps stressing at press
conferences that he is so mentally strong. To me he is not even close to
Nadal in this department. He has lost several of the encounters against
him because of mental focus (some of the matches on clay last year
especially).

PS.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 20:47:47
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 29 jan, 18:59, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>>>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>>>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>>>>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>>>>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>>>>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>>>>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>>>>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>>>>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>>>>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>>>>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>>>>> moment.
>>>> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
>>>> Simon's awkward style
>>> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
>> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
>> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
>> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>
> Federer indeed said he thinks he benefits in the open conditions with
> sun and the wind because of his experience. I didn't think he meant
> that with Nadal in mind though but in general. Nadal's beaten him
> plenty of times in the heat as well as in the wind.
>
> Fed's victories over Rafa; Miami (hot, 5 sets), W (mild, 4 sets), YEC
> (indoors, straights), Hamburg (fresh, humid, 3 sets), W (warm, 5
> sets), YEC (indoors, straights)
>
> This suggest indoors is best for Federer when facing Nadal.
>
> The only thing we know is that indoors Federer's unbeaten against
> Nadal, so I do wonder how he feels about it.

Nadal plays better in the wind because of his bigger margins.

Looking their h2h and who lost in or out could lead to wrong conclusion
since indoors they play on synthetic and very fast surface.

--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 09:59:49
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
> >>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
> >>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> >>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
> >>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
> >>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> >>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> >>> consistency will decide the outcome.
> >> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
> >> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
> >> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
> >> moment.
>
> > He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> > Simon's awkward style
>
> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.

You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 20:27:48
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>>>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>>>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>>>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>>>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>>>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>>>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>>>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>>>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>>>> moment.
>>> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
>>> Simon's awkward style
>> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>
> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.

Nadal prefers open roof too. He wasn't happy to play Simon with closed
roof...it takes power away from his strokes: Lower and slower bounce,
according to commentators here...which would imo be accurate
description, Nadal did seem to need a bit more zip against Simon. I
don't know where you got the idea that closed roof speeds up the
play...as I just described that's not what I've heard.

I believe it's essential for Nadal to have open roof in the final.

--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 20:31:04
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
TT wrote:
> andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>>>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>>>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>>>>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>>>>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>>>>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>>>>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>>>>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>>>>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>>>>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>>>>> moment.
>>>> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
>>>> Simon's awkward style
>>> That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.
>>
>> You think Nadal suffers from a closed roof? The commentators seem so
>> far to be of the opinion that the ball has more jump off the court
>> with it closed. Honest question - I'm not trying to needle you, as I
>> think Federer may prefer open roof vs. Nadal.
>
> Nadal prefers open roof too. He wasn't happy to play Simon with closed
> roof...it takes power away from his strokes: Lower and slower bounce,
> according to commentators here...which would imo be accurate
> description, Nadal did seem to need a bit more zip against Simon. I
> don't know where you got the idea that closed roof speeds up the
> play...as I just described that's not what I've heard.

>
> I believe it's essential for Nadal to have open roof in the final.
>

Not quite certain actually...Federer plays lot different than Simon. But
I do believe that little more reactive surface(than against Simon) is
better for effectiveness of Nadal's own game.


--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 08:50:23
From:
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 4:44=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 10:35=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 29, 11:23=A0am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for Fed/
> > > Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>
> > h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> > consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
> > only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
> > the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> > Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> > consistency will decide the outcome.
>
> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
> moment.

He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
Simon's awkward style





  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 16:55:22
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>> moment.
>
> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> Simon's awkward style
>
>
>


Simon was very dangerous - played at 100% of his ability & didn't miss.
Kudos to Rafa for winning in straights.



  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 19:32:17
From: TT
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 29, 4:44 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>> This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>> Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>> peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>> moment.
>
> He didn't play that well against Simon - but maybe that was due to
> Simon's awkward style
>
>
>

That, baddish day and because the roof was closed.

--
"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: 29 Jan 2009 08:44:43
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 10:35=A0pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com > wrote:
> On Jan 29, 11:23=A0am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for Fed/
> > Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>
> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> consistency will decide the outcome.

This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
moment.


  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 01:29:37
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:44:43 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
<arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 29, 10:35 pm, wkhedr <wkh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Never happened in a major yet.  What is the overall record for Fed/
>> > Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>
>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>
>This will be a very close match (assuming Nadal goes past Verdasco).
>Unless Federer is planning to play much better in the final, like peak
>peak stuff. Nadal is consistently playing phenomenal tennis at the
>moment.


plus if he has too he can CHEAT right ?


 
Date: 29 Jan 2009 08:35:01
From: wkhedr
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
On Jan 29, 11:23=A0am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Never happened in a major yet. =A0What is the overall record for Fed/
> Nadal matchups on hard courts?

h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
consistency will decide the outcome.



  
Date: 30 Jan 2009 16:53:05
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final
wkhedr wrote:
> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>
> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
> consistency will decide the outcome.
>


Fed isn't scared of consistent baseliners - he's scared of Rafa's
ripping spin that constantly puts him on the defensive.


   
Date: 30 Jan 2009 06:58:39
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Federer vs Nadal hard court final

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:498295c8$0$14894$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> wkhedr wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 11:23 am, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Never happened in a major yet. What is the overall record for Fed/
>>> Nadal matchups on hard courts?
>>
>> h2h means nothing now. Nadal improved generally and Federer's
>> consistency for the last year can't say where Federer's game is. The
>> only thing I can say is that if Federer came to play his game and with
>> the right tactics against Nadal and was in good form, he will beat
>> Nadal, but if he came scared and his day form was not good, Nadal's
>> consistency will decide the outcome.
>>
>
>
> Fed isn't scared of consistent baseliners - he's scared of Rafa's ripping
> spin that constantly puts him on the defensive.


I'd like to that if I may, who knows what's in his head, maybe he isn't
even scared of it, but he just doesn't have an answer to it.