Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Federer vs. Nadal

Posted on 11/28/10 at 11:53 am
Posted by rollthatback
Member since Jun 2008
3035 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 11:53 am
ESPN 2 now

Fed up 1 set to nil
This post was edited on 11/28/10 at 12:19 pm
Posted by Bread Orgeron
Baw Bakery
Member since Aug 2006
11848 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 12:54 pm to
Nadal just won the second set. 1-1 now
Posted by eddieray
Lafayette
Member since Mar 2006
18023 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:15 pm to
good match. Fed leads the 3rd set 3-1
Posted by TulaneTigerFan
Seattle
Member since Sep 2005
35856 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:27 pm to
Federer cruised through the 3rd set 6-1 and now leads the head to head 6-4 on surfaces other than clay.
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27875 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:30 pm to
Had Nadal won today would most people have given up the other srufaces argument in favor of Fed?
Posted by TulaneTigerFan
Seattle
Member since Sep 2005
35856 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:32 pm to
I doubt it. The past his prime excuse probably would have come out
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27875 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 1:51 pm to
Yea that's true.
Posted by barry
Location, Location, Location
Member since Aug 2006
50346 posts
Posted on 11/28/10 at 2:04 pm to
3 set matches dont mean shite
Posted by PokerLawyer
Member since Apr 2010
454 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

I doubt it. The past his prime excuse probably would have come out

Did anyone catch the segment, during the 2nd set I believe, where the conversation of GOAT sort of developed? Don't remember who the commentator was, but it was with respect to Fed and Sampras - that when the two met, Sampras was past his prime but that Fed had not yet reached his. The discussion was, in effect, that when that happens, you actually do get a fair measure of who's "better." (Understanding that it's only the best-guess scenario). The logic was that where two players are equally away from their prime, because both are old - both are young - or one is old and the other young, that it can be a good indicator of the inherent talent, rather than athleticism, endurance, etc... that will typically go to the young.

@ 3 years ago, IMO, Fed started to lose his strangle-hold, when Nadal was about to hit his stride. But, about 3 years ago, Fed was by far the more dominant player. That said, Fed pulled out an amazing tourney this past week at the year end Championship, beating Nadal to do it. He may have lost a step or two, but my God - GOAT? AbsoF'Nlutely.
Posted by TulaneTigerFan
Seattle
Member since Sep 2005
35856 posts
Posted on 12/1/10 at 1:04 pm to
quote:

That said, Fed pulled out an amazing tourney this past week at the year end Championship, beating Nadal to do it.


It was a really impressive tourney for Federer. He beat Murray, Soderling, Djokovic, and Nadal all in succession while only losing one set in the final. Hopefully he can carry that positive momentum into next year. I thought that Annacone really helped him here, as he seemed to attack Nadal in ways that he hasn't in the past.
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 1:05 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram