Arena Federer/Nadal/Djokovic Era - Now 1/3rd Over

comparing across eras is so hard. would they both have to use tiny wood rackets?

i think what sets nadal apart from borg on clay, and at the roland garros in particular, isn't the fact that nadal won 7 out of 8 french opens and borg only won 6 out of 8. it's that nadal had the greatest tennis player of all time, and a great clay court player in his own right, to contend with and he beat him in the final 5 times.

 

Great points, of course. No one else in Borg's time was remotely close to him on clay, at least not so far as I know, whereas Federer would almost certainly have multiple titles at Roland Garros if not for Nadal. The one he has will always have a small but noteworthy asterisk attached (one that says "didn't have to play Nadal").

I meant to imply that Borg would be a more recent player and have modern rackets, but I think I left that part in my head.

 

this is off topic, but a thing i think is cool is how young legends when they are first coming up will play against the aging greats of the previous generation. and you can quickly trace today's stars back to the legends of the early open era. for instance federer played sampras who played mcenroe who played borg who played laver. you can bridge the gap quicker if you go from sampras to connors to laver. it doesn't mean much really, but it's a cool little facet of the sport's history.

 

I know Federer didn't break through at Wimbledon for a title until 2003, but I don't think Federer played someone at Sampras' level again at Wimbledon until Nadal in 2006, and then not really until 2007, when Nadal took two sets off him.

On the Sampras-Federer video, scoot ahead to about 1:46 or so to see Federer make a shot that just about matches the one he made against Nadal in 2008 to save match point. It's a bit more sharply angled than the one in 2008, but they're similar overall.

The meeting of past and future icons is always interesting in general. One of the most notable, I think, is Agassi vs. Connors in 1987 at the US Open, which is when the famous "He's a punk, you're a legend!" comment was made from the crowd. In 2006, Rafael Nadal signaled the end of Agassi at Wimbledon, and went on to lose to Federer in the final (which set the stage for his eventual triumph there in 2008).

 

The odds are on two very boring matches today and tomorrow. A one-sided Williams victory and then a one-sided Nadal win. I didn't see that 87 match, but I remember the 89 U.S. open quarter final.

 

Although Sharapova fought hard in the first set. And the second started well too.

 

Serena could tie Navratilova and Evert in singles titles this year if she wins Wimbledon and the U.S. Open.

 

Ferrer was playing Nadal very tough through the first several games. He gets broken and before you know it, Nadal's won the set. It's pretty much over now. Ferrer is not going to beat Rafael Nadal three sets out of four at Roland Garros. Reminds me a bit of 2011, when Nadal yanked back control of the match after Federer came out strong.

 

yah, Ferrer fought hard in the first, just as Sharapova did against Williams yesterday.

 

Nadal just destroying Ferrer away right now. It's raining, and at the rate it's coming down, there's a good chance of a rain delay. I'm surprised that Nadal picked up his pace at about the same time the rain began, because last year he struggled with the more damp weather.

 

too bad about the rain. Another amazing effort from Ferrer and still down 4-1 in the second.

 

Good gracious-- someone ran an actual flare onto the court. It was on fire for at least a couple minutes before it was finally extinguished just off the court.

 

it's interesting that the majors have such a history of getting a crazy attention seeker on court, and that security has never really been able to completely prevent it.

 

Well, the Seles incident happened at a non-major, in Germany, but that doesn't really matter much.

Nadal wins, as expected.

 

That went pretty much as expected, but I thought it was a very watchable, enjoyable match despite the straight set outcome. And at least Federer doesn't have to feel lonely having his Roland Garros hopes frustrated multiple times against Nadal domination. Djokovic knows the drill too.

 

The champion is back, baby

 

i have to confess, i got up a little after 7 to watch the match, saw the score was 6-3, 3-0 and went back to bed.

 

It was a better match than that. If it's possible to go down fighting in a straight set loss, Ferrer did it.

 

I'm surprised, you would think in the two decades since the Seles incident there would be not just better security at all Tennis events, but better security at a major of all places!

Edit: No sound, but it gives you the clearest view of what was going on:

 

On to Wimbledon. They love Nadal there, and I hope he gets himself one more Wimbledon title, so as to quiet the murmurs of the people who say that he's still mostly just a clay court specialist. Three Wimbledon crowns would tie him with McEnroe and Becker, among others.

 

i'm really looking forward to wimbeldon. a healthy nadal, and federer trying to become the second player to win the same major eight times only weeks after rafa became the first. also murray is coming back. hopefully he can return to form and his back doesn't give him any trouble.

i think if nadal can win one more wimbeldon and one more hard court major, and assuming he wins one or two more frenches, the debate of who's the greatest ever would become wide open.

 

Just found this thread - can't believe I missed it. I am a die-hard Federer fan and have defended him against haters for years, but I don't really see another major in his future unfortunately. I will still defend him as the GOAT though ;-)