French Open 08

Fly High

Hi everyone, I was just wondering who you think will win this year?

I'm a huge Rafa fan and even with his messed up foot I think he'll win without trouble, so do you think Fed will ever capture this title? I think he only can if Rafa gets badly injured... Or could Novak cause the upset?

It should be a good one anyways!

pd101

I'd love to see Federer win the French Open at least once. Hopefully he will do it this year. I have a feeling Serena Williams might win the womens this year also.

BazBox

Louise~ wrote: »

Hi everyone, I was just wondering who you think will win this year?

I'm a huge Rafa fan and even with his messed up foot I think he'll win without trouble, so do you think Fed will ever capture this title? I think he only can if Rafa gets badly injured... Or could Novak cause the upset?

It should be a good one anyways!

Huge Nadal fan myself, hope he gets his own five in a row like federer has at wimbledon. dont want federer winning it all and can only see djokovic causing an upset.

pd101

pd101 wrote: »

I'd love to see Federer win the French Open at least once. Hopefully he will do it this year. I have a feeling Serena Williams might win the womens this year also.

There goes that feeling :rolleyes:

Fly High

I think aftrer todays performance against Sharapova that Safina has a really good chance of winning the womens...
As for the mens I'm stickin with Rafa, I'm a big fan too and he looks invincible on clay, I know obviously he isn't and all... but he looks it!:D

pd101

Louise~ wrote: »

As for the mens I'm stickin with Rafa, I'm a big fan too and he looks invincible on clay, I know obviously he isn't and all... but he looks it!:D

Think you might be right. 6-1 6-1 6-1 today against Almagra today.

Kevster

I'm actually heading out to Paris to see the women's final on Saturday. I'm guessing Jankovic will be in it (and will probably win it!).

Marshy

Semi-final line-ups complete now after today's play:
Mens
Federer Swi 1 v Monfils Fra
Djokovic Ser 3 v Nadal Spa 2


Womens
Safina Rus 13 v Kuznetsova Rus 4
Jankovic Ser 3 v Ivanovic Ser 2

Everything still seems to point to a Nadal Federer final in the mens but the womens is hard to call, all players seem pretty evenly matched.

pd101

Kevster wrote: »

I'm actually heading out to Paris to see the women's final on Saturday. I'm guessing Jankovic will be in it (and will probably win it!).

I dont know, it looks like Safina's name is on the trophy. As for the mens Nadal should win out but Federer v Monfils could be interesting.

BazBox

pd101 wrote: »

I dont know, it looks like Safina's name is on the trophy. As for the mens Nadal should win out but Federer v Monfils could be interesting.

very interesting indeed, monfils is a home favourite and the crowd will be against federer for once, saying that he'll probably win in straight sets as usual

id say ivanovic will win the womens, since henin retired its between her and sharapova for womens number one

COME ON NADAL!!!

jackdaw

I hope FED wins .. Nadal is a disgrace to tennis ... a DISGRACE ...

pumping his fists and shouting to intimidate the opponent, time wasting,

over Celebrating when he wins a normal point ... he's a disgrace ...

davyjose

jackdaw wrote: »

I hope FED wins .. Nadal is a disgrace to tennis ... a DISGRACE ...

pumping his fists and shouting to intimidate the opponent, time wasting,

over Celebrating when he wins a normal point ... he's a disgrace ...

Lol, sour grapes anyone?

The guy is the better on Clay than Federer is on any other surface.

If any professional sportsman is intimidated by pumping his fist (something they all do) then they don't deserve to be a professional.
It was Djokovic who tried to take a toilet break in the middle of the 2nd set when he went down a break - so there's yyour time-wasting!!!

Oh yeah, and Fed has NO chance.

Aaron M

davyjose wrote: »

The guy is the better on Clay than Federer is on any other surface.

5 times consecutive Wimbledon champion and 4 times consecutive US Open champion would seem to suggest otherwise.

Prufrock

davyjose wrote: »

Oh yeah, and Fed has NO chance.

No chance eh? No such thing. You always have a chance.

BazBox

Prufrock wrote: »

No chance eh? No such thing. You always have a chance.

Not against Nadal on clay:D

pd101

Federer v Nadal in the final. The Federer / Monfils match was an exciting enough one but Federer will really have to up is game if he is to give Nadal a run for his money.

Marshy

jackdaw wrote: »

I hope FED wins .. Nadal is a disgrace to tennis ... a DISGRACE ...

pumping his fists and shouting to intimidate the opponent, time wasting,

over Celebrating when he wins a normal point ... he's a disgrace ...

Is this meant to be facetious? Well I guess having all the players as robots like Davydenko would make tennis fascinating to watch.

Anyhow, I expect Nadal fist-pump, intimidate and time waste his way past Rog on Sunday. Oh and he may just play better tennis than him too like he has throughout the tournament. No point talking about that though.

Really enjoyed the Fed Monfils game earlier must say. Fed just did enough against Monfils who really upped the ante from his previous games.

Safina looking good for me in the ladies

Marshy

Marshy wrote: »

Safina looking good for me in the ladies

Great prediction there! Ivanovic was excellent in the final and won quite easily in straight sets, 6-4 6-3.

Bring on the Mens final now. Nadal looks invincible but one would be naive to totally write off Rog. Should be a great match whatever happens.

jackdaw

Marshy wrote: »

Is this meant to be facetious? Well I guess having all the players as robots like Davydenko would make tennis fascinating to watch.

Anyhow, I expect Nadal fist-pump, intimidate and time waste his way past Rog on Sunday. Oh and he may just play better tennis than him too like he has throughout the tournament. No point talking about that though.

Really enjoyed the Fed Monfils game earlier must say. Fed just did enough against Monfils who really upped the ante from his previous games.

Safina looking good for me in the ladies

Lets hope the little cuñt will lose today against Fed...

jackdaw

Federer handling NAdal points at the mo ....

giftwrapping them ...

estebancambias

Has the word Pwned ever been more suitable when describing Nadal's ownage of Roger on clay.

Marshy

jackdaw wrote: »

Lets hope the little cuñt will lose today against Fed...

Asking a bit much there really...

estebancambias wrote: »

Has the word Pwned ever been more suitable when describing Nadal's ownage of Roger on clay.

Yeah, it was an absolute hiding out there. Apart from the middle of the second set where it was competitve, Raf just dominated totally. Fed held serve 3 times in the match I think.

I just hope Nadal wins Wimbledon now this year because in fairness Rog has had the edge over him there, winning the last two finals. Still has to prove to some he's not just a one-trick pony and can win grand slams on other surfaces too. Maybe this year...

davyjose

Aaron M wrote: »

5 times consecutive Wimbledon champion and 4 times consecutive US Open champion would seem to suggest otherwise.

Then that would be misleading. Fed could not do, on grass or hard courts, what Rafa did to him in this years final. That is COMPLETE dominance. Last years Wimbledon was a five setter, won with the help of tie-breakers - Roger is nowhere close to doing that to Nadal.

MisterAnarchy

davyjose wrote: »

Then that would be misleading. Fed could not do, on grass or hard courts, what Rafa did to him in this years final. That is COMPLETE dominance.

Federer beat himself today.
He was very poor.
His gameplan was all wrong right from the start.
He didnt go for the lines enough,didnt employ enough top spin on certain shots,didnt use the sliced backhand enough.
He didnt vary the pace of the ball either ,just kept hitting flat shots pretty much straight back to Nadal.
He looked a beaten man mentally.
Nadal hit all his serves to the Federer backhand ,an alarming fact ,yet Federer never reacted to this by standing nearer the sideline.
After pushing Nadal to the limit last year ,a match Federer should have won had he taken even half his break points ,he played like a man who had learnt absolutely nothing today.
It is a mental issue that is stopping Federer beating Nadal on clay.
He has the game to beat him.

davyjose

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Federer beat himself today.

I disagree. I think Nadal beat him. I'm not being facetious here - I know what you mean.But Nadal would have beaten him regardless of how Fed played today. That was an absolute masterclass of how to play on clay. And to say otherwise - to not take your hat off to his ability - is grossly unfair to Nadal.

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

He has the game to beat him.

Not over three sets on clay. That is not to say he will never beat him at RG (if Nadal had won Wimbledon last year, as he so very nearly did, I would not be saying he's the best on grass). He ha the game to beat him, but if they both play their best, then Nadal will always win on that particular surface. And given the simple facts of the last four years, denying that would smack of bias IMO.

MisterAnarchy

Nadal played very high quality tennis today ,very few unforced errors.
Federer was poor though,huge number of unforced errors (35)
As you said Nadal should have beaten Federer at Wimbledon last year but likewise Federer was the better player at Roland Garros last year .
He had 17 break points but took only a couple whereas Nadal won all his 4.
Federer cant seem to take his break points against Nadal and it is most likely a mental issue.
Federer was really out of sorts ,his winning % on 2nd Serve was 21 %,shocking.
Federe needs to go back to the drawing board and refocus himself plus improve his technique as he is not the same player he was a year ago.

pd101

That was a disappointing final today. I think it was a combination of Nadal being brilliant and Federer not at his best. Nadal seems to have a "Tiger Woods" effect when it comes to playing on clay. If Federer had of went into that match mentally 100% it wouldn't have been so one sided.

No one would have beaten Nadal today though.

davyjose

I just think that Nadal gets a lot of stick while Federer "the greatest player ever"* is greeted with this divine right to win by his fans. It's as if Nadal has a cheek winning instead of Roger. Even Fed himself clearly holds Rafa in high esteem.
I gained an awful lot of respect for Nadal when he reached the Wimbledon final in '06. Before that I thought he was just another Clay-court specialist, another Bruguera or Kuerten who couldn't do it on any other surface. But what is apparent now is that Nadal is just simply an awesome Tennis player whose skills were honed on clay (he is spanish) and if anything that's more of a hindrance than anything else - he's the one who has had to adapt to other surfaces. Which he has done successfully IMO.
Mark my words, Nadal WILL win other Grand Slams besides the French.

*Incidentally I don't think Fed is the best player ever - Borg and Sampras played in an era with other greats (Connors, McEnroe; Becker, Agassi), whilst Fed spent the bulk of his reign (up until now) amongst the Roddicks, the Nalbandians, the Safins. We'll see if Fed still wins 3 GS's per year now that Djokovic and Nadal have matured.

Aaron M

davyjose wrote: »

whilst Fed spent the bulk of his reign (up until now) amongst the Roddicks, the Nalbandians, the Safins.

So has Nadal. Apart from Federer, what other great players has he beaten?

Just for the record, I'm not trying to disrespect Nadal - I think he's an excellent player. I do, however, take issue with people criticising Federer's competition whilst praising Nadal for his.

The problem for Federer is that the majority of the matches he has played against Nadal have been on clay, which of course heavily favours Nadal and in my opinion skews the perception of the rivalry in Nadal's favour a little too much at times, so that during the clay court season Nadal's status becomes somewhat over-inflated. Federer has proven he can do it on all surfaces (for all his failures against Nadal on clay, he has still reached three consecutive French Open finals, a feat that the great Pete Sampras could not even manage once). If it wasn't for a super-human effort on the part of Marat Safin in the 2005 Australian Open, Federer would have won 3 out of the 4 Grand Slam titles for the last 4 years running - 4 years in which Nadal rarely featured in any other Grand Slam apart from the French Open and (recently) Wimbledon, despite clearly being the no.2 player in the world.

I do accept your point, however, that Djokovic and Nadal are forcing Federer to raise his game, but so far he has proven up to the task (beating Nadal in the previous two Wimbledon finals and Djokovic in the previous US Open final). This year has been a poor year for him so far, given his extremely high standards, but I still make him the favourite at both Wimbledon and the US Open.

I also completely agree that Nadal will win Grand Slam titles on surfaces other than clay, but whether he will do so having beaten Federer along the way remains to be seen.

davyjose

Aaron M wrote: »

So has Nadal. Apart from Federer, what other great players has he beaten?

Well everyone that Federer has beaten. My point is that 2/3 years ago, before Nadal and Djokovic really hit form, Fed had it easier. Nadal has had to face Fed his entire career so far. He would undoubtedly have many more (non-French) majors under his belt if he were the one 5 years older than Fed, or even the same age.

Aaron M wrote: »

Just for the record, I'm not trying to disrespect Nadal - I think he's an excellent player. I do, however, take issue with people criticising Federer's competition whilst praising Nadal for his.

I'm not doing this - quite the reverse, I believe it''s Nadal who gets the harder criticism.

Aaron M wrote: »

The problem for Federer is that the majority of the matches he has played against Nadal have been on clay, which of course heavily favours Nadal and in my opinion skews the perception of the rivalry in Nadal's favour a little too much at times

On Hard courts its 3-2 Fed, on Clay its almost all Rafa (7-1), and the two on grass have gone to Roger. About even I reckon.
I think Fed is better - no question. Even Nadal - today - said he's number 2 in the world (closer to 3 than to 1). But I don't think nadal gets nearly enough credit. I quote "a disgrace to Tennis"??? Come on!!! What was Federer's record on his 22nd birthday?

Aaron M wrote: »

If it wasn't for a super-human effort on the part of Marat Safin in the 2005 Australian Open, Federer would have won 3 out of the 4 Grand Slam titles for the last 4 years running - 4 years in which Nadal rarely featured in any other Grand Slam apart from the French Open and (recently) Wimbledon, despite clearly being the no.2 player in the world.

Again, he's 22, what do you want from him? To match what a legend is doing for the last 4 years - since his teens - in order to have any credibility?
And 2 finals in 2 years at Wimbledon is surely deserving of some kudos, if Fed gets credit for his achievements at Roland Garros. I think your using stats to suit your point there. "(recently) Wimbledon" is a little bit dismissive of the qualities it takes to reach both of these finals even once in your career even on different years. Mcenroe did it once; Becker - never; Sampras - never; Lendl has reached the Wimbledon final twice - in his entire career.

Aaron M wrote: »

I do accept your point, however, that Djokovic and Nadal are forcing Federer to raise his game, but so far he has proven up to the task (beating Nadal in the previous two Wimbledon finals and Djokovic in the previous US Open final). This year has been a poor year for him so far, given his extremely high standards, but I still make him the favourite at both Wimbledon and the US Open.

I agree with this.

Aaron M wrote: »

I also completely agree that Nadal will win Grand Slam titles on surfaces other than clay, but whether he will do so having beaten Federer along the way remains to be seen.

He'll do it before Fed does it to him

Edit: It'll be a US or Aussie open i reckon.

Aaron M

davyjose wrote: »

I'm not doing this - quite the reverse, I believe it''s Nadal who gets the harder criticism.

On the contrary, I believe it is Federer who gets the harsher criticism. The fact that he has reached three consecutive French Open finals (on clearly his worst surface, clay) completely gets overlooked simply because he hasn't quite yet managed to beat Nadal. Clay negates one of his strongest weapons (his serve), making it very difficult for him. Sampras was never competitive with the greatest clay court players of his era (on clay - he never even reached the final at RG and he has a poor record there in general), yet that seems to get overlooked an awful lot.

What bothers me is that (if the 'weak era' argument is to be believed) Nadal needs Federer's name on his Roland Garros resumé just as much as Federer needs his. I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe that in his 4 years at RG, Nadal has only ever beaten one former French Open champion (Moya, in 2007).

davyjose wrote: »

But I don't think nadal gets nearly enough credit. I quote "a disgrace to Tennis"??? Come on!!! What was Federer's record on his 22nd birthday?

To be fair, that guy was obviously trolling - I wouldn't have even bothered responding to him! Nadal is of course not a 'disgrace' - he's very respectful to Federer. He's just a hell of a competitor - that puts some people off.

I also completely agree about Federer being somewhat of a 'late-bloomer' as it were. Nadal has a much better record than Federer has at 22. I think, however, that Federer simply lacked the confidence up until his first Wimbledon victory. His record since then is phenomenal. The fact that he has won all of his Grand Slam titles in such a (relatively) short space of time is truly remarkable. If it wasn't for Nadal, Federer would have had at least two consecutive calendar year Grand Slams (comprising all 4 majors). It looks like that may never happen now though (the odds are against it).

davyjose wrote: »

Again, he's 22, what do you want from him? To match what a legend is doing for the last 4 years - since his teens - in order to have any credibility?

Of course not. I was just trying to point out that questioning Federer's level of competition (which I don't agree with) must also throw a shadow over Nadal's. If you actually look at Federer's opponents in his Grand Slam victories, the majority of them are multiple Grand Slam winners themselves (or, at the very least, multiple Grand Slam finalists). I think his record stacks up extremely well with the likes of Sampras.

davyjose wrote: »

And 2 finals in 2 years at Wimbledon is surely deserving of some kudos, if Fed gets credit for his achievements at Roland Garros.

I completely agree - it IS deserving of tremendous kudos! As I said before though, I believe Nadal gets more praise for his Wimbledon finals than Federer gets for his French Open finals, simply because Nadal has the better head-to-head record (due to the majority of their matches being played on clay).

davyjose wrote: »

"(recently) Wimbledon" is a little bit dismissive of the qualities it takes to reach both of these finals even once in your career even on different years. Mcenroe did it once; Becker - never; Sampras - never; Lendl has reached the Wimbledon final twice - in his entire career.

I accept your point. Like I said though, I really feel that people chastise Federer an awful lot (just as much as Nadal, if not more so) for his failures on clay, which perhaps is why I'm 'defending' him as it were

I'm not even a big Federer fan (I always will be a Sampras fan first and foremost)!

davyjose wrote: »

He'll do it before Fed does it to him

If either of them do it at all

davyjose wrote: »

Edit: It'll be a US or Aussie open i reckon.

Just to clarify, do you mean that his first non-clay GS will be a US or Aus Open, or that the first time he beats Fed in a non-clay GS will be a US or Aus Open? Nadal has a seriously great chance of claiming a Wimbledon title - we already know he can make the final (the fact he's done it two years in a row also proves he's not a one-hit wonder on the surface too).

MisterAnarchy

Another point that must be mentioned is that Federer is not 100% fit.
He had a bout of glandular fever earlier this year a condition that takes a long time to recover from.
He looked a shadow of himself yesterday,he never once seemed to get angry or emotional which seemed very strange.

BazBox

davyjose wrote: »

I just think that Nadal gets a lot of stick while Federer "the greatest player ever"* is greeted with this divine right to win by his fans. It's as if Nadal has a cheek winning instead of Roger. Even Fed himself clearly holds Rafa in high esteem.
I gained an awful lot of respect for Nadal when he reached the Wimbledon final in '06. Before that I thought he was just another Clay-court specialist, another Bruguera or Kuerten who couldn't do it on any other surface. But what is apparent now is that Nadal is just simply an awesome Tennis player whose skills were honed on clay (he is spanish) and if anything that's more of a hindrance than anything else - he's the one who has had to adapt to other surfaces. Which he has done successfully IMO.
Mark my words, Nadal WILL win other Grand Slams besides the French.

*Incidentally I don't think Fed is the best player ever - Borg and Sampras played in an era with other greats (Connors, McEnroe; Becker, Agassi), whilst Fed spent the bulk of his reign (up until now) amongst the Roddicks, the Nalbandians, the Safins. We'll see if Fed still wins 3 GS's per year now that Djokovic and Nadal have matured.

I too thought Nadal was a one surface wonder when he won the french open in 2005. He then was knocked out of wimbledon in the 1st or 2nd round(cant remmeber which one). I was happy in my mind that i was right about Nadal until I saw that in every match Federer played at wimbledon in 2005, Nadal was in the crowd watching(learning from the master some might say:p)When you see something like that you realise this player doesnt just want to be the best on clay, he wants to be the best tennis player in the world, and it will happen eventually

davyjose

Aaron M wrote: »

Just to clarify, do you mean that his first non-clay GS will be a US or Aus Open, or that the first time he beats Fed in a non-clay GS will be a US or Aus Open? Nadal has a seriously great chance of claiming a Wimbledon title - we already know he can make the final (the fact he's done it two years in a row also proves he's not a one-hit wonder on the surface too).

Yeah, I think he's more likely to beat Fed on a hardcourt than at Wimbledon. I'd be surprised if Nadal wins Wimbledon this year to be honest (but of course wouldn't rule it out).

I know what you mean about Fed not getting credit for not winning the French, but if you're going to be regarded as the best player ever, then you're going to have to expect questions like that.
I personally don't hold it against him. I think he's incredible, and have said on many occasions in the past that he was the best Sportsman - in the world, but never winning the French - he'd tell you this himself I reckon - would have to be regarded as a disappointment, if it doesn't happen.

Aaron M

davyjose wrote: »

Yeah, I think he's more likely to beat Fed on a hardcourt than at Wimbledon. I'd be surprised if Nadal wins Wimbledon this year to be honest (but of course wouldn't rule it out).

Fed's lack of form though must be a real concern to him (and his fans) having lost to both Djokovic and Nadal in the opening two Slams of the season. Normally, I would say that defeat at the French would not affect him at Wimbledon, but he's been very lacklustre by his own incredibly high standards so far this year.

I hope it's not a sign of permanent decline on his part though - he should still have another few years at the top (if he keeps his motivation up). At one point, it looked likely that he would set a record for GS titles that would probably never be beaten, but as it stands he still needs to win two more just to equal Sampras' record (a third if he wants to beat it obviously).

davyjose wrote: »

I know what you mean about Fed not getting credit for not winning the French, but if you're going to be regarded as the best player ever, then you're going to have to expect questions like that.

Yes I agree. If we're talking G.O.A.T.* status, then Fed must be subject to more stringent criticism than his peers.

davyjose wrote: »

I personally don't hold it against him.

To be honest, I used to. I've spent years cheering for his opponent in every GS final he has played (as ashamed as I am to admit that now)!

davyjose wrote: »

but never winning the French - he'd tell you this himself I reckon - would have to be regarded as a disappointment, if it doesn't happen.

I don't think there's any doubt about that at this stage. I would enjoy seeing him do a calendar year Grand Slam but I don't think it's going to happen now. His aura of invincibility is gone, and once that leaves you (and any of the best in any sport will say the same thing) it never comes back!

*Greatest Of All Time

pd101

I agree with Aaron M. I think Nadal is more likely to win Wimbledon (good chance that it will be this year) before he wins on a hardcourt. His record in the Austrailian and US Opens isn't as good as the other two Majors.

Federer is just having a bad year. He will probably bounce back.

Fly High

Well it looks like I missed a lot of discussion, and defending Nadal... I think the results speak for themselves... As for wimbledon I know Rafa is good enough to win it but the question is can Fed pull himself together and play some of the tennis that made him great in the first place? I dunno if he can...

And to update Nadal has just won Queens... who knows now what will happen at Wimbledon...

davyjose

Louise~ wrote: »

Well it looks like I missed a lot of discussion, and defending Nadal... I think the results speak for themselves... As for wimbledon I know Rafa is good enough to win it but the question is can Fed pull himself together and play some of the tennis that made him great in the first place? I dunno if he can...

And to update Nadal has just won Queens... who knows now what will happen at Wimbledon...

If it's true that Queens is a trickier surface than Wimbledon, then the signs look ominous for anyone outside the Nadal camp.

I'm gonna throw a tenner on him anyway

MisterAnarchy

Federers decline is primarily due to one reason and one reason only.
Glandular fever, from which Federer suffered at the beginning of the year, is a debilitating and often recurrent problem that is rarely banished from the body in a few weeks.
It can take 6-12 months for a person to get back to normal health.
Mario Antic was out for 6 months because of the same illness.