Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

What do you think about the sports world?
Post Reply
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

In what was arguably the most exciting sporting highlight of 2008 thus far Rafael Nadal overcame Roger Federer in a ridiculously over the top 5 set thriller at Wimbledon today.

Did anyone watch this? It was a colossal battle, with some of the best tennis seen in recent memory, if not ever.

Absolute edge of your seat viewing, I can barely imagine sport better than this. Two champions, experts, playing their hearts out and playing as well as is virtually possible to play the sport. Completely incredible!

It was amazing. I don't know if anyone's a tennis fan here, it seems to be more of a European sport, so may get lost behind the thrilling excitement of baseball (only kidding) in the US.

Seriously though, even if you aren't into it, today was a fantastic, epic, legendary sporting day in history.

!

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/06072008/ ... -epic.html

Image
User avatar
Boogahz
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9438
Joined: July 6, 2002, 2:00 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: corin12
PSN ID: boog144
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Boogahz »

I caught some of this after I woke up, and I was surprised it was still going! Wasn't that the last possible match they could play today when Nadal won?
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

It went on for a fairly epic 7+ hours with rain delays and such. It was getting a little dark by the end, but nothing that would detract from the legitimacy of the win. The legitimacy of the win is about the most legitimate thing that probably happened in sport this year. Unbelievable.

Either finalist deserved to win, it was a total spectacle of excellence throughout. The fact Nadal has won is an incredible blow to Federer's long standing dominance in the game. But really, both of them were truly and utterly exceptional today. It was unreal.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Sueven »

Awesome match.

If I was gay, Nadal would be on the top of my list.
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

hehe, yeah, wasn't it?

A really fantastic sporting display. Incredible!
User avatar
Ogbar
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 538
Joined: July 3, 2002, 2:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Greblaja
Location: Rhode Island

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Ogbar »

I sadly missed most of the match, but I did catch everything after the last rain delay (was 2-2 in the 5th at that point). Wow. I could not believe the energy those guys had so late in the match. I was quickly reminded of that great match years ago between Borg and Mac (their epic tie-breaker), but when it was all said and done, this year's final blows that one out of the water. I only wish I had seen the whole thing.

Nick, professional Tennis is pretty much ignored here except for Wimbledon and the US open, and to a lesser degree the French Open. Given the expectations (that were met) of a great match, I'm sure it got a huge TV audience here. I think the only thing that trumped the competition was the class shown by both players in the post game interviews. What a great day for Tennis.
Ogbar - a member of the Tiger's Roar retirement community
User avatar
Kluden
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1827
Joined: November 13, 2002, 7:12 pm
Location: D.C.

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Kluden »

Just a great year for Wimbledon tennis as a whole. The women's and the girl's finals were great too! I haven't seen tennis that good in a long time.
User avatar
Chidoro
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3428
Joined: July 3, 2002, 6:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Chidoro »

I think they are going to replay the match on espn classic tonight or tomorrow night. I only got a few glimpses at the match but espn did a good job walking through it. The stoppages obviously helped Federer and Nadal had 4 championship points. 4! And some of the shots I saw in the highlights were absolutely insane. For Nadal to do it on grass is incredible because he had less than 10 aces compared to the 25 from Federer.
I really wish I was able to watch more of it. Just amazing guts and grit by both.
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

I didn't get to watch it yesterday, but I saw the highlights on ESPN. It looked epic indeed. I'll be catching the replay tonight on ESPN Classic.
Zamtuk
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4781
Joined: September 21, 2002, 12:21 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Zamtuk »

I watched it from the first rain delay on. It was a fantastic watch. And I don't even watch tennis!

Anyone else notice how Nadal's left arm is rediculously disproportionate to this right arm? It's pretty odd given that he is a righty that hits left.
Fuck Michigan!
Lynks
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2774
Joined: September 30, 2002, 6:58 pm
XBL Gamertag: launchpad1979
Location: Sudbury, Ontario

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Lynks »

This was the first tennis match I watched in 2 years. Great timing on my part. What a great battle between these two.
User avatar
Canelek
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9380
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Canelek
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Canelek »

Going to watch replay as well. I have not watched a skirtball match since Agassi-Sampras.

Was Nadal wearing Capris pants?
en kærlighed småkager
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

Neither Agassi or Sampras could hold a fucking candle to either of these two players. I liked both Agassi and Sampras, but they are both a league below these two guys (of course we are talking subtle qualatative difference here), but its pretty much a fact to anyone who knows anything about tennis.

But yes, he was, Nadal has an unfortunate tendency to pick his bum during matches, always funny to see the ladies reaction on that one :)
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27525
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Winnow »

Long hair Agassi would have mopped the floor with them but short hair Agassi not so much.

Image

Looks like Agassi's enjoying his retirement with Steffi.

http://nfsctour.com/letsgohomesteffi.jpg

Those kids don't look Iranian at all. What's up with that Xyun?
Zamtuk
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4781
Joined: September 21, 2002, 12:21 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Zamtuk »

Nick wrote:Neither Agassi or Sampras could hold a fucking candle to either of these two players. I liked both Agassi and Sampras, but they are both a league below these two guys (of course we are talking subtle qualatative difference here), but its pretty much a fact to anyone who knows anything about tennis.

But yes, he was, Nadal has an unfortunate tendency to pick his bum during matches, always funny to see the ladies reaction on that one :)
Didn't Sampras beat Federer in an exhibition match earlier this year?

10 years after his prime?
Fuck Michigan!
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

Well, frankly, you're talking about the 3 game series: which Federer won, easily.

You're telling less than half the story in that post. But that's ok. I suspect Tennis isn't your favourite sport. But it is mine! :)

The point of giving Sampras a match in that exhibition was because the whole event was mainly for shits and giggles, and not the intention of being a total whitewash and schooling a now, what, nearly 40 year old Sampras? (which in a serious match it would have been). But what's the point in that? For anyone? Have you never seen a Tennis exhibition match?

Those are the matches designed for pure entertainment (where McEnroe shouts "you cannot be serious", the players do ridiculous shots, imitate each other etc) I don't know if you've noticed, but Tennis is a game of sportsmanship. Humiliating Sampras 3 love was not in any way the point of the event.

So no, that is a victory that is a entirely irrelevant, frankly. :roll: It was probably agreed to before they walked on court.

But, in fairness, and there's no doubt about it, Sampras was amazing. Especially compared to the mostly shitty players of his day (Agassi was on a downward slope for a long time for much of Sampras' career and the rest of the pack were predominantly one dimensional ace hitters - YAWN). Although, Ace hitting was also a big Sampras play, as was all top flight men's tennis then. Despite my full acknowledgement that Sampras was a fantastic player, he also existed in a period of mens tennis where there were no other real competitors up to matching his level. You see this in Boxing all the time, and other sports. Sampras' huge Open victory tally is largely due to this. Frankly.

Ivan Lendl was not the best tennis player ever, yet was number one for longer than McEnroe, or Borg, or Connors. That doesn't mean he was better than them in their prime - he wasn't (He did beat an ageing McEnroe at one point (1985 Us open?), but that's not really the same as say...this final of Wimbledon that we just experienced). (Although Lendl was still amazing). (in Boxing, you wouldn't say that Kelly Pavlik was the best ever Middleweight, because Middleweight Boxing is fucked atm. He's not on the level of say...Roberto Duran, or Sugar Ray Leonard.)

The tennis Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/any top 20 player plays now is substantially more talented and enjoyable tennis than that played ten years ago - that's a basic fact of reality that anyone who knows anything about tennis acknowledges. It's not up for discussion, because the discussion is ridiculous. It's better in virtually every way except passion, which remains a constant in all sports. But still, in terms of skill, fitness, tactics and greatness it truly is a golden age right now for tennis, and not the doldrums of Ace hitting that existed when Sampras was number 1.
Nationality/pride in your previous heroes has little to do with this reality.

The courts and such have been slowed down specifically because mens tennis was becoming somewhat of a joke. But frankly, the only people still whining about men's tennis being "ace related boredom" are those that haven't watched a match since Sampras played.

I'm honestly not trying to detract from the brilliance of Sampras, and he was brilliant, absolutely fantastic, in the somewhat lowly period of men's tennis of the 1990's - but really, if Sampras was at his prime nowadays, he wouldn't be able to trouble either Nadal or Federer, even on a bad day. Especially with the courts as they are now. I play, watch and coach a lot of tennis, believe me, it's an educated guess. Or don't, I don't really give a shit.

So, no, the Sampras "victory" over Federer was pretty much for show, ultimately.

I'm being realistic about it btw, I loved Sampras and what he achieved was amazing, but that doesn't mean I have to delude myself into thinking that Sampras was ever on the same level as Federer or Nadal. And frankly, if Federer, or Nadal had played Sampras in a proper match 10 years ago, they probably still would have demolished him. The tennis being played now is virtually unrivalled in the history of the game. But its one of those things that can not ever be proven, so believe whatever you want if it makes you happy :roll:

And if you don't believe me, just because on a different sub forum on a different subject I happen to think that US foreign policy is fucking retarded just because it actually is, then just spent some time in a month or so listening to the commentators in the upcoming US open for an hour.
Zamtuk
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4781
Joined: September 21, 2002, 12:21 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Zamtuk »

It has nothing to do with your politics at all. I just think it's absurd to think one of the greatest tennis players of all time couldn't hold a match to the top players today. This is the same discussion as the Tiger Woods theory (only good player in a shitty field). Hell, look at Roddick, I think he is overrated, yet he was able to pull off a victory against Federer earlier this year. Since Sampras is a shitload better than Roddick (really fair assumption), odds are he would have better luck against Federer. Not to say that Federer or Nadal wouldn't beat Sampras more than vise versa, but it damn sure wouldn't be as lopsided as you think.
Fuck Michigan!
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27525
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Winnow »

I agree with the Aussie.

People quote changing conditions, equipment, etc for why today's players are better. You can't really say that unless you get either Nadal and Federer to play with the conditions/equipment Sampras had or give Sampras the same conditions today and watch them compete...of course age/prime years becomes a factor.
User avatar
Canelek
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9380
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Canelek
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Canelek »

There should be a "Legends" skirtball league and then they could all test their mettle against one another! :D None of this explains the capris pants though!
en kærlighed småkager
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Sueven »

I disagree with Nick. I'm not a huge Agassi fan, but he was a pretty great player, and Sampras was better. I think very highly of both Federer and Nadal, and they may very well be (one or both) better than Sampras, but to pretend that there's no comparison strikes me as wrong.
Nick wrote:But, in fairness, and there's no doubt about it, Sampras was amazing. Especially compared to the mostly shitty players of his day (Agassi was on a downward slope for a long time for much of Sampras' career and the rest of the pack were predominantly one dimensional ace hitters - YAWN). Although, Ace hitting was also a big Sampras play, as was all top flight men's tennis then. Despite my full acknowledgement that Sampras was a fantastic player, he also existed in a period of mens tennis where there were no other real competitors up to matching his level. You see this in Boxing all the time, and other sports. Sampras' huge Open victory tally is largely due to this. Frankly.
During the latter years of Sampras and Agassi's careers and on into their retirement, men's tennis was dominated by stars like Lleyton Hewitt and Marat Safin and Juan Carlos Ferrero and, of course, the luminary Andy Roddick. During this period of time, all the talk wasn't about the golden era of men's tennis that was overshadowing the dark ages of the 1990s-- it was about the current dark ages of tennis, and whether we'd ever get back to the golden era of the 1990s. You'll probably recall that women's tennis was overshadowing men's tennis to a substantial degree at this point. Now, media attention is not really any way to measure greatness, I'm just saying that we need to have some perspective here-- not long ago, men's tennis was in the shitter, and there was just a rising pup named Federer who was beginning to consolidate his spot on top of the heap. Federer has clearly established his greatness at this point, and Nadal has just recently made the transition from the best clay-court player in the world to an all-around star.

And sure, there were no other players up to Sampras' level during his time if you choose to discount Agassi's greatness. In him, we're talking about a flawed-but-brilliant player who has amassed some truly impressive accomplishments-- the first guy to win the career grand slam since the 1960's, for instance. Sure, the competition he beat for that achievement isn't quite as great as that which was around during some periods in tennis history, but it's not like there wasn't any competition-- Sampras was around, for instance. If you discount Federer and Nadal, the rest of men's tennis doesn't exactly have stunning resumes right now, largely because Federer and Nadal are busy racking up all the titles. There are other great players now, but nobody on the Federer/Nadal level-- and nobody on the Sampras/Agassi level either.
Nick wrote:The courts and such have been slowed down specifically because mens tennis was becoming somewhat of a joke. But frankly, the only people still whining about men's tennis being "ace related boredom" are those that haven't watched a match since Sampras played.
Sure, I agree. I also agree that this results in enhanced fitness and tactics, because you need better fitness and tactics on faster courts. I don't know that it's overly relevant. Nadal isn't a big server and he does best on the slowest courts-- could he have handled Sampras on grass or hard court at the speeds of the 1990s? Almost certainly not. Similarly, Sampras probably couldn't handle Nadal on clay today. Agassi, never a big server, would likely have benefited from slower courts. If Federer and Nadal were the same age as Sampras and Agassi, they would be different tennis players. If Sampras and Agassi were the same age as Nadal and Federer, they would be different tennis players.

I guess what I'm saying is: The current era of tennis produces better tennis than the 1990s, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the current batch of tennis players are better than those of the 1990s. There's a basketball analogy here-- recent rule changes in the NBA have resulted in a game which is more entertaining, higher-scoring, and requires more basketball skill. This is a fact. But it doesn't detract from the greatness of the Chicago Bulls or Michael Jordan, who played in the slowest, most boring, least skill-oriented era in NBA history.

And let's not forget that several major tennisy folks (that is, people who pay attention to tennis, not ignorant folks who look at total major wins) have declared Sampras to be the greatest in modern history-- including those periods of time when guys like Borg and McEnroe were running around. I find it tough to accept the eye-rolling "well just listen to anybody who knows anything about tennis if you don't believe me" arguments when, in my experience, many people who do know something about tennis disagree with you. I'm not going to run and do a google search to prove my point, but I don't think it's necessary anyway.

I'm not trying to detract from Federer or Nadal at all here-- I think that Federer very well may be the greatest player in history when he's through, and Nadal has a chance to accomplish the same. Hell, if Federer quit now, I might end up considering him the greatest ever. But I just can't agree that there's no comparison, or that Sampras in his prime on the courts of his day would get smoked by Nadal at the U.S. Open or Wimbledon, or that Federer would win every match the two of them would play.

And I'll of course assume that your perceived anti-American political beliefs have nothing to do with your position, and I'll hope you'll extend me the courtesy of assuming that my nationality has nothing to do with mine.
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Nick »

It has nothing to do with your politics at all. I just think it's absurd to think one of the greatest tennis players of all time couldn't hold a match to the top players today. This is the same discussion as the Tiger Woods theory (only good player in a shitty field). Hell, look at Roddick, I think he is overrated, yet he was able to pull off a victory against Federer earlier this year. Since Sampras is a shitload better than Roddick (really fair assumption), odds are he would have better luck against Federer. Not to say that Federer or Nadal wouldn't beat Sampras more than vise versa, but it damn sure wouldn't be as lopsided as you think.
He was able to pull off a victory because Federer was pretty damn ill for the better part of this years circuit. When Federer is fit, Roddick is demolished. Go look at their head to head history if you don't believe me.

I don't think it would be "lopsided", I just think Federer or Nadal would frankly comfortably defeat Sampras if they were both at their peak. Disagree all you want, it really doesn't change the fact that's what would happen.

Sueven, I'm afraid you don't really know what you're talking about here. As much as I appreciate the effort.
User avatar
Thess
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1033
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:34 am
Location: Connecticut

Re: Legendary Wimbledon Final - Nadal v Federer

Post by Thess »

Federer had mono from (as early as) December until around March.

This match was one of the best I've ever seen, it was just amazingly fun and entertaining.
Post Reply