PDA

View Full Version : Austin Is To Evert As Nadal Is To Federer?


SelesFan70
Jun 11th, 2006, 07:30 PM
Between 1979 and 1980, Evert was the #1 player in the world, but Austin beat her 5 of 6 times in one stretch, much like Nadal has done to Roger. Of course, Evert eventually figured out the Austin puzzle as I'm sure Federer will figure out the Nadal puzzle.

(Uhm, Roger, move in because he is going to serve to your backhand) :o

Carmen Mairena
Jun 11th, 2006, 07:52 PM
So true! But I'm sad because if Roger had played as he did in the first set, he'd probably have won this match and give a shot at a Grand Slam... :mad: :sad: :crying2:

Wimbledon's around the corner... :devil:

MisterQ
Jun 11th, 2006, 07:58 PM
Thanks for making that parallel. A few weeks ago I was trying to come up with an instance in men's tennis history where the clear No. 1 could not seem to beat the No. 2 for an extended period of time. I couldn't think of one, but you're right, there has been a similar situation on the women's side. :cool:

samn
Jun 11th, 2006, 08:45 PM
Thanks for making that parallel. A few weeks ago I was trying to come up with an instance in men's tennis history where the clear No. 1 could not seem to beat the No. 2 for an extended period of time. I couldn't think of one, but you're right, there has been a similar situation on the women's side. :cool:

Except that Evert wasn't the clear #1 in 1979-80 when Austin was beating up on her. Navratilova was ranked #1 and Austin #2. I doubt that many people thought of Evert as the #1 player after she lost to Navratilova in the '79 Wimbledon final and then to Austin in the '79 US final.

Scotso
Jun 11th, 2006, 08:48 PM
Austin would have continued to do well were it not for the injuries. :p

Vamos Rafa.

spiceboy
Jun 11th, 2006, 08:51 PM
Thanks for making that parallel. A few weeks ago I was trying to come up with an instance in men's tennis history where the clear No. 1 could not seem to beat the No. 2 for an extended period of time. I couldn't think of one, but you're right, there has been a similar situation on the women's side. :cool:

Last year it looked like we were having history repeated remembering Graf vs Seles :worship:

First match, the clear #1 wins in a tough match (Roland Garros 89 vs Miami 05) while the following matches the young newcomer takes the world by storm winning their following meetings (including great Roland Garros matches in both situations) :help:

But since then, while the top girls were sharing their victories, amazing Rafa keeps winning and winning...

Danči Dementia
Jun 11th, 2006, 08:53 PM
Austin would have continued to do well were it not for the injuries. :p

Vamos Rafa.

:) :) Well rafa has proved that he is the best and period.
I love to see federer loosing and I love to see Rafa winning.

spiceboy
Jun 11th, 2006, 08:54 PM
And actually, what really shocks me is that today Federer fell to 0-4 against Nadal this year while he's 44-0 against everyone else :tape:

Elldee
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:03 PM
Surely it's Austen is to Evert as Nadal is to Federer?

jj74
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:05 PM
Nadal's game is very uncomfortable to Federer. Federer is number one without doubt but in clay Nadal is the best, and he will be better on the other surfaces in injuries respect him

SelesFan70
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:06 PM
Except that Evert wasn't the clear #1 in 1979-80 when Austin was beating up on her. Navratilova was ranked #1 and Austin #2. I doubt that many people thought of Evert as the #1 player after she lost to Navratilova in the '79 Wimbledon final and then to Austin in the '79 US final.

I thought Evert ended 1979 #2 while she and Navratilova battled Austin for #1 throughout the year... :scratch: I'll have to check that. Thanks for pointing it out! :wavey: I guess with Evert not being at #1 it would tarnish my analogy. :o

LeRoy.
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:07 PM
Surely it's Austen is to Evert as Nadal is to Federer?

yeah

but to me its Seles is to Graf as Nadal is to Federer :bounce:

SelesFan70
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:08 PM
Surely it's Austen is to Evert as Nadal is to Federer?

I changed it. :wavey:

Danči Dementia
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:09 PM
Nadal's game is very uncomfortable to Federer. Federer is number one without doubt but in clay Nadal is the best, and he will be better on the other surfaces in injuries respect him


Well Ndal also beat Roger thsi yaer in hard :) :) .

LeRoy.
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:10 PM
I changed it. :wavey:

yeah but you forgot to put Roger in there :wavey:

Scotso
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:33 PM
I love to see federer loosing and I love to see Rafa winning.

ditto :D

SJW
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:43 PM
:cool:
Satisfaction is sweet :kiss:

thrust
Jun 11th, 2006, 09:56 PM
Rafa is only 20 and with his physical and mental abilities he could equal or surpass Roger on hard courts very soon. They are 1-1 on hard courts now. It took Roger 5 sets to beat Rafa in Miami last year, his only win against Nadal.

anlavalle
Jun 11th, 2006, 10:17 PM
:retard: yeah

but to me its Seles is to Graf as Nadal is to Federer :bounce:

anlavalle
Jun 11th, 2006, 10:18 PM
don`t worry Roger you has all the other GS :bounce:

Jasmin
Jun 11th, 2006, 10:34 PM
I think Roger will figure out Nadal. I agree if you look at Federer's game he is still the best player.


Look at how Blake has Rafa's number but no one seems to say he is better than Rafa.

I still think Federer is the best.

Pureracket
Jun 11th, 2006, 10:56 PM
While Federer is figuring Rafa out, Rafa's volleys need to develop, and his shots need to get flatter.

RedCap999
Jun 11th, 2006, 11:01 PM
Yeah, what is going on with Federer.

jj74
Jun 11th, 2006, 11:28 PM
While Federer is figuring Rafa out, Rafa's volleys need to develop, and his shots need to get flatter.

I don't think his shots need to get flatter in fact one of his great advantages is the effect of his shots

Foot_Fault
Jun 12th, 2006, 01:36 AM
So true! But I'm sad because if Roger had played as he did in the first set, he'd probably have won this match and give a shot at a Grand Slam... :mad: :sad: :crying2:

Wimbledon's around the corner... :devil:

So wrong, Roger, didn't change his play from the first set. Nadal was just missing EVERYTHING in the first set.

Did you see the first set stats?

AnDyDog621
Jun 12th, 2006, 01:51 AM
So wrong, Roger, didn't change his play from the first set. Nadal was just missing EVERYTHING in the first set.

Did you see the first set stats?

Nadal and Federer missed about the same amount except that Nadal usually doesn't miss as much. In the 2nd set, Roger got more errors on his backhand while Nadal had almost none. Roger did seem like he was playing worse than in the first set.

Geisha
Jun 12th, 2006, 03:12 AM
Rafa is only 20 and with his physical and mental abilities he could equal or surpass Roger on hard courts very soon. They are 1-1 on hard courts now. It took Roger 5 sets to beat Rafa in Miami last year, his only win against Nadal.

That is true, but in tournaments Federer won on grass/hard, Nadal didn't advance far enough to face him.

eck
Jun 12th, 2006, 03:17 AM
I hope Federer thumps Nadal on grass: 6-0, 6-0, 6-0

Sam L
Jun 12th, 2006, 03:54 AM
Rafa has just won his last slam. :lol:

Scotso
Jun 12th, 2006, 04:03 AM
Rafa has just won his last slam. :lol:

Didn't you say that last year?

Couver
Jun 12th, 2006, 04:11 AM
I think for now there is definetly a parallel between both situations. But Rafael is only 20 and while he certainly loves the clay, he's spoken about improving his game on both grass and hard. Being so young I think he can definetly improve. I think he and Federer could have a great rivalry over the next few years, and I really think it's short sighted to paint Rafael as a one surface player.

Ferosh
Jun 12th, 2006, 04:52 AM
:woohoo: Rafa!

Reuchlin
Jun 12th, 2006, 04:55 AM
I hope Federer thumps Nadal on grass: 6-0, 6-0, 6-0
Still won't make up for failing to win the French: an event that would CLEARLY make Roger one of the best tennis players in the history of the sport. Also won't take the pain away of the lost possibilty of a non-cald. year grand slam, and then a cald. year grand slam...

Ferosh
Jun 12th, 2006, 05:00 AM
I think this loss is going to be a huge mental blow for Federer. I would not be too surprised if the "domination" begins to slip.

madame_maria
Jun 12th, 2006, 05:19 AM
i think Roger's game is just too good for the rest.

the only one that can CONSISTENTLY pick on his weakness would be Nadal with his topspin groundstrokes to the backhand. and i'm not saying that Roger's backhand isn't good. it just, isn't as superb as the rest of his game.

the high backhand will always be a problem with singlehanded backhanders and Nadal just has this advantage over Roger.

i doubt Roger's domination end, he's not going to be anyone's bitch, much less Nadal. he'll eventually get a couple of wins over Nadal when the latter's feeling a little less energetic after a long long winning spree or something.

hwanmig
Jun 12th, 2006, 06:37 AM
Between 1979 and 1980, Evert was the #1 player in the world, but Austin beat her 5 of 6 times in one stretch, much like Nadal has done to Roger. Of course, Evert eventually figured out the Austin puzzle as I'm sure Federer will figure out the Nadal puzzle.

(Uhm, Roger, move in because he is going to serve to your backhand)

More like Nadal ----> Evert than Nadal ----> Austin

Evert - 7 time French Open
Nadal - 2 wins in two French Open

Roger sucks period

Sam L
Jun 12th, 2006, 06:49 AM
More like Nadal ----> Evert than Nadal ----> Austin

Evert - 7 time French Open
Nadal - 2 wins in two French Open

Roger sucks period
LMAO.

Evert won all four slams. Roger has won all but one.

Rafa is only able to win French Open, just like Tracy was only able to win the US Open. :lol:

Rafa is a specialist. He'll never win a slam other than French and he'll never be the greatest player ever.

Fact.

MistyGrey
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:13 AM
Roger still is the better player day in day out.. Nadal can beat him for the next 100 matches, but if he keeps winning the French and Roger the other three, I wont be bothered at all. Its a pity Nadal is not good enough to reach the semis/finals on grass, otherwise their head to head would be more interesting.

Sam L
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:18 AM
Roger still is the better player day in day out.. Nadal can beat him for the next 100 matches, but if he keeps winning the French and Roger the other three, I wont be bothered at all. Its a pity Nadal is not good enough to reach the semis/finals on grass, otherwise their head to head would be more interesting.
He hasn't even reached the QF of any slam other than the French! And they say he can play on all surfaces.

:haha: :haha: :haha:

eck
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:32 AM
I'm sorry, I used to support Rafael, his shot making was breathtaking, but his jumping around in court, and taking a long time before serve is just annoying me to a whole new level.

Marcus1979
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:32 AM
he should of beaten Hewitt in AO last year :angel:

gillibean
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:01 AM
how come everyone is saying roger's only losses have been to rafa - didnt he lose to tommy haas in a leadup to the australian open event, maybe kooyong?

Marcus1979
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:06 AM
Kooyong is a exhibition event

it does not count

samn
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:13 AM
I thought Evert ended 1979 #2 while she and Navratilova battled Austin for #1 throughout the year... :scratch: I'll have to check that. Thanks for pointing it out! :wavey: I guess with Evert not being at #1 it would tarnish my analogy. :o

No, you're right. At the end of 1979, Navratilova was #1, Evert #2, and Austin #3 on the official WTA rankings. However, most experts ranked Austin above Evert since she had reached both the Avon and Colgate series finals in 1979 (losing to Navratilova both times) and had beaten Evert en route to the Italian, US, and Filderstadt titles. Evert's only major triumph in 1979 was the French Open in a depleted field with most of the other top players missing.

Austin overtook both Navratilova and Evert with a strong showing in the Avon circuit of 1980, which was where she repeatedly bitchslapped Evert, beating her something like three times in three weeks. Going into the 1980 US Open, Austin was #1, Navratilova #2, and Evert #3.

I can't see the parallel with Federer/Nadal mainly because Evert was not dominant. Navratilova was the 1979 World Champion and the WTA Player of the Year, and Austin her biggest challenger in the first quarter of 1980.

Couver
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:26 AM
People really should let time tell the story. Rafael is only 20 and he's already won 2 majors, he's also done pretty well on hardcourt. I think it's just wishful thinking to say he won't ever do anything of signifigance except on clay. For a long time people thought Roger wouldn't live up to his expectations, he lost early on in a lot of majors until one day it just clicked.

The fact that people feel the need to belittle what Rafael has done leads me to believe he's considered a bigger threat than they'd like to let on.

per4ever
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:32 AM
It's just a mental problem for Roger. He doesn't seem to believe he can beat Nadal. When Roger plays his topgame, he's so much better then the rest (including Nadal)

Orion
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:58 AM
If Nadal can prove capable of doing well on the summer hardcourts, and beating Federer on faster surfaces (i.e. not early hardcourt events), he could eclipse Federer at 3/4 grand slams.

But let's face it, Nadal is no Borg. He is not going to win Wimbledon, he simply doesn't have what it takes, serve-wise and game-wise.

spec7er
Jun 12th, 2006, 01:10 PM
Nadal is just a bad match up to Roger's game. But one reason behind the lopsided head-to-head is that they played on surfaces that either lessen the effectiveness of Federer's game or increase the effectiveness of Rafa's game.

Federer's game is more for fast courts especially with the style of play he has. Once they meet on grass, maybe a faster hardcourt or an indoor court, I would guess it'll even out a bit.

Jasmin
Jun 12th, 2006, 05:44 PM
It's just a mental problem for Roger. He doesn't seem to believe he can beat Nadal. When Roger plays his topgame, he's so much better then the rest (including Nadal)


I agree. That mental thing is something else.

LUIS9
Jun 12th, 2006, 05:47 PM
:) :) Well rafa has proved that he is the best and period.
I love to see federer loosing and I love to see Rafa winning.

On clay no doubt, I would have to see him win the US open before I call him the best.

Stamp Paid
Jun 12th, 2006, 06:41 PM
LMAO.

Evert won all four slams. Roger has won all but one.

Rafa is only able to win French Open, just like Tracy was only able to win the US Open. :lol:

Rafa is a specialist. He'll never win a slam other than French and he'll never be the greatest player ever.

Fact.

:bigclap::bigclap:

Now, if only you could get rid of this Hingis fascination....

.ivy.
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:32 PM
I hope Federer thumps Nadal on grass: 6-0, 6-0, 6-0

Wurd up. I feel that Roger has figured Nadal's game out, he just doesn't act on what he knows he should do. Nadal is in Roger's mind now, and I think Roger needs a good win to know that he can beat him.

DevilishAttitude
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:39 PM
I think this loss is going to be a huge mental blow for Federer. I would not be too surprised if the "domination" begins to slip.

No.

Federer still has total domination over everyone else. Since Rafael will do nothing till the next clay season, Roger will be the #1 player by a mile :)

But, Roger is gone against Nadal, which is sad since he's so much more talented than him :sad:

LUIS9
Jun 12th, 2006, 07:45 PM
No.

Federer still has total domination over everyone else. Since Rafael will do nothing till the next clay season, Roger will be the #1 player by a mile :)

But, Roger is gone against Nadal, which is sad since he's so much more talented than him :sad:

I wouldn't throw the word talented around so loosely, a much more complete player by a mile for sure. Being athletic is a talent and few are more athletic than mr Vamooos.

Carmen Mairena
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:03 PM
When Nadal is out because of the EVIDENT doping abuse (see: my left arm is bigger than my left leg :retard: ) Roger will be able to compete against non-cheating players and then win the f*cking Grand Slam! :yeah:

Jasmin
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:11 PM
When Nadal is out because of the EVIDENT doping abuse (see: my left arm is bigger than my left leg :retard: ) Roger will be able to compete against non-cheating players and then win the f*cking Grand Slam! :yeah:

:lol: I couldn't help but laugh.

FedExpress
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:18 PM
When Nadal is out because of the EVIDENT doping abuse (see: my left arm is bigger than my left leg :retard: ) Roger will be able to compete against non-cheating players and then win the f*cking Grand Slam! :yeah:

Well I don't think that Nadal does something illegal. He's just a great player.
I'm looking forward to a match on Fed's favourite surface. But I think it will take some time until Nadal is good on grass...

Jum_p_Over
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:27 PM
LMAO.

Evert won all four slams. Roger has won all but one.

Rafa is only able to win French Open, just like Tracy was only able to win the US Open. :lol:

Rafa is a specialist. He'll never win a slam other than French and he'll never be the greatest player ever.

Fact.

Actually i think Nadal has a good chance to win the aussie eventually and maybe the us open. Wimbledon will be the hardest, but it wouldn't surprise me if nadal won 3/4 slams. Nadal has proven that he can not only play with federer on hardcourts (was up 2-0 and a break in the 3rd at nasdaq), but he can beat him (doha final). So please, give nadal more credit :rolleyes:

Jum_p_Over
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:31 PM
how come everyone is saying roger's only losses have been to rafa - didnt he lose to tommy haas in a leadup to the australian open event, maybe kooyong?

Nope, 0-4 against Nadal this year, 44-0 against everyone else

Jum_p_Over
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:33 PM
People really should let time tell the story. Rafael is only 20 and he's already won 2 majors, he's also done pretty well on hardcourt. I think it's just wishful thinking to say he won't ever do anything of signifigance except on clay. For a long time people thought Roger wouldn't live up to his expectations, he lost early on in a lot of majors until one day it just clicked.

The fact that people feel the need to belittle what Rafael has done leads me to believe he's considered a bigger threat than they'd like to let on.

Yes, QFT

FedExpress
Jun 12th, 2006, 08:40 PM
how come everyone is saying roger's only losses have been to rafa - didnt he lose to tommy haas in a leadup to the australian open event, maybe kooyong?

It wasn't a regular tournament. It was a fun tournament (or something like that ;) ).

!<blocparty>!
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:12 AM
*skimming through most of thread*

LMAO. Uh, no.

Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer 6-3 6-3. Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer 2-6 6-4 6-4.

His game is great for hardcourts, really high bounce and amazing kick on the serve. He'll be challenging at the USO/Aus very soon. :) Grass? No. He can improve his serve, though. It was working really well in Dubai.

And oh, people saying Fed outclassed him in the first set, Fed gave him no chance yada yada. What the fuck ever. Nobody seemed to notice Rafa was playing like a lame duck retard. 12 UFE's in 7 games. But yeah, VAMOS! :D

harloo
Jun 13th, 2006, 02:06 AM
Did anyone see how Blake disposed of Nadal at the U.S. Open last year? Anyone who says that he is better than Roger is seriously in denial. He is good on clay and is just one of the only two players(the other being Nalbandian) that has a mental advantage over Roger.

Also Nadal's style of play will catch up to his body in a few years. He plays so hard that with age it's bound to break down.

!<blocparty>!
Jun 13th, 2006, 02:12 AM
He is good on clay and is just one of the only two players(the other being Nalbandian) that has a mental advantage over Roger.
.

:lol: Fat Dave does not have a mental advantage over Fed.

faboozadoo15
Jun 13th, 2006, 02:34 AM
That is true, but in tournaments Federer won on grass/hard, Nadal didn't advance far enough to face him.
yep.....