Is Nadal Now The Wimbledon Favorite?

First topic message reminder :

Last year Nadal felt unable to compete at Wimbledon but this year he's feeling a little better

"I want to try to play well again in Wimbledon," he said. "I'm healthy. That's the most important thing."

"I hope my knee will have the positive feeling on grass, because I feel my knee is better than last year on the rest of the surfaces,"

"Grass always was a little bit harder for me after the injury. Last year I tried, but I was not ready to compete at Wimbledon.

"Let's see how my feelings are there this year, but it's a very important tournament."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/27757048

Is Nadal now the favorite to add to his Wimbledon trophy collection? Nadal always has to win Wimbledon the tricky way as part of a channel slam but despite this I reckon he is now the favorite  

kneel_before_nadal wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Nadal was taken to 5 sets by both in 2010

Only 4 with Rosol

Again facts

Rosol played better than Haase and Petz.

That is not what the stats say and not what the rankings say about the players either.

kneel_before_nadal wrote:^ Seriously, you have to watch the matches.

No, seriously, you can't state an opinion and then say it's a fact.
Actually, you can, but you look kind of silly doing it.

Also if Nadal is in mercurial form like k_b_n claims then how come he dropped a set against Kukushkin - a player he has marmalised in straight sets in his previous two matches against him?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hmmm he won in straight sets in 2010 in 1st Round V Nishikori, 2nd Round won in 5 sets against Haase (would say he was better than any of the opponents he has faced so far) and taken to five sets in 3rd Round against the seeded Petzschner. So in 2010 against much better players he dropped four sets in the first three rounds whereas here has dropped three sets against players all ranked 50+ in the world so that statement is very dubious.

TBH I think Nadal is playing better in 2014 than 2010.

Yes Nadal was dropping sets to better players in 2010, but following what happened in 2012/2013. Many people felt that Nadal can now be bombed out earlier on grass.

I mean Nadal was 0/3 on grass prior to beating Klizan. So his confidence must've been pretty low but he's found a way to win and with every passing match looks stronger.

Of course there are truths in what you say but dropping sets in three consecutive matches against players ranked 50+ in the world is not form that shouts out - unbeatable. That is the point I am getting at. If he comes up against someone more consistent and hits big he will not find their level dropping off and pressure will grow and comebacks become much tougher.

Very true but I don't think Nadal's ever been unbeatable on grass.

And I think against Raonic, Federer and Murray/Djokovic, Nadal knows how those players will play.

Whereas the lower ranked players come out swinging, Nadal gets in his bunker and tells his opponent can you keep this up for another 2/3 hours.

I think a certain amount of confusion has arisen here, and I'd like to step in and help clarify matters.

It would appear that the random thoughts & musings of KBN are being treated as purely subjective opinion.

Whilst it has long been accepted that the comments posted here by most members are invariably little more than opinion, this is obviously not the case with KBN, whose posts should henceforth be taken without question as empirical fact - simply because we have already been told that they are .........

kneel_before_nadal wrote:^ I just report the facts.

Gerry SA wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hmmm he won in straight sets in 2010 in 1st Round V Nishikori, 2nd Round won in 5 sets against Haase (would say he was better than any of the opponents he has faced so far) and taken to five sets in 3rd Round against the seeded Petzschner. So in 2010 against much better players he dropped four sets in the first three rounds whereas here has dropped three sets against players all ranked 50+ in the world so that statement is very dubious.

TBH I think Nadal is playing better in 2014 than 2010.

Yes Nadal was dropping sets to better players in 2010, but following what happened in 2012/2013. Many people felt that Nadal can now be bombed out earlier on grass.

I mean Nadal was 0/3 on grass prior to beating Klizan. So his confidence must've been pretty low but he's found a way to win and with every passing match looks stronger.

Of course there are truths in what you say but dropping sets in three consecutive matches against players ranked 50+ in the world is not form that shouts out - unbeatable. That is the point I am getting at. If he comes up against someone more consistent and hits big he will not find their level dropping off and pressure will grow and comebacks become much tougher.

Very true but I don't think Nadal's ever been unbeatable on grass.

And I think against Raonic, Federer and Murray/Djokovic, Nadal knows how those players will play.

Whereas the lower ranked players come out swinging, Nadal gets in his bunker and tells his opponent can you keep this up for another 2/3 hours.  

Fair points Gerry. The likes of Djoko and Murray should look at adopting a far more aggressive game plan against him and they may be pleasantly suprised by the results.

well, dont know if favourite, but match by match he gets closer

naxroy wrote:well, dont know if favourite, but match by match he gets closer

Oh of course he is one of the favourites but wouldn't be putting him as a hot favourite or anything.

I agree with you up to a point CC but its my view that Rafa always seems to come back stronger when he has come from behind... as I always have believed that Rafa plays better when he is at No 2.  There is something in that competitive streak of Rafa's that seems to like to be challenged... today contrary to what some believe that the roof favours Rafa... I think not... he look decidedly ill at ease with the indoor conditions which he does not favour...if you remember it was the nail in Rafa's coffin when he played Rosol two years ago.. they stopped the match and put the roof on.. yes he has to adapt to that and he did. But once Rafa feels under threat he seems to bring out his best tennis and I believe he played some of his best in the last two sets. Against a tougher opponent he is going to have to up his game a bit quicker

when this thread was started, I think the draw wasnt even set...
to the question of nadal being favourite or not before hand, my thoughts were: well, he is number 1 and has reach finals in last 3 slams, so that makes him favourite, but also he is prone to early exits in the last two seasons here, so that sets a more unpredictable scenario.
regarding his lack of confidence in the surface, the draw was supposed to play an important role in nadals chances, above all looking at first 2-3 rounds
after the draw it looked as if nadal hadnt been lucky at all, but that has been argued too, anyway, fact is, nadal is in 4th round, and will face a talented oponent but with lack of experience in the venue. so for me nadal is favourite to reach quarters, from then on... who knows.

thinking about quarters is too risky as nadal is not there yet, but just in theory:

I think nadal might prefer raonic to nishikori, if the japanese is going to bring his madrid game here

CaledonianCraig wrote:

kneel_before_nadal wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Nadal was taken to 5 sets by both in 2010

Only 4 with Rosol

Again facts

Rosol played better than Haase and Petz.

That is not what the stats say and not what the rankings say about the players either.

Tennis experts watch tennis.
Do you watch tennis, or do you just look at numbers?
You can't tell the quality of a match unless you watch it.
If Nadal mauls Federer in the upcoming semi, will you say Nadal played better than he played in the 2008 final simply because the margin of victory was greater?   

Actually, all I was doing was throwing a few stat facts in there unlike you who was calling your statement as a fact without any evidence whatsoever.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Actually, all I was doing was throwing a few stat facts in there unlike you who was calling your statement as a fact without any evidence whatsoever.

The evidence is the match. You have to watch it.

So lets see:-

Nadal loses a set against Kukushkin for the first time in three matches losing a tiebreak in which he said himself he served poorly.

He also lost sets against players ranked 50+ in the world in the 1st and 2nd rounds. Now I am a Murray supporters and if Andy had dropped sets in all three of his matches so far I wouldn't be making brash statements - more like berating him for not being more ruthless.

Also lets remember in 2010 he was having a little purple patch on grass whereas since then he has the mental scars of Rosol and Darcis still fresh in the mind.

kneel_before_nadal wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

kneel_before_nadal wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Nadal was taken to 5 sets by both in 2010

Only 4 with Rosol

Again facts

Rosol played better than Haase and Petz.

That is not what the stats say and not what the rankings say about the players either.

Tennis experts watch tennis.
Do you watch tennis, or do you just look at numbers?
You can't tell the quality of a match unless you watch it.
If Nadal mauls Federer in the upcoming semi, will you say Nadal played better than he played in the 2008 final simply because the margin of victory was greater?   

So are you a tennis expert? Because clearly they are the only ones who watch it

CaledonianCraig wrote:Also lets remember in 2010 he was having a little purple patch on grass whereas since then he has the mental scars of Rosol and Darcis still fresh in the mind.

No mental scars to be seen. He's just won 3 straight matches from a set down. Especially that Rosol match- lost the 1st set, down a break in the 2nd set, and showed zero fear.

The point is in how many slam tournaments has Rafa dropped a set in each of the first three rounds? I'd hazard a guess not many at all especially against players ranked 50+ in the world.

CaledonianCraig wrote:The point is in how many slam tournaments has Rafa dropped a set in each of the first three rounds? I'd hazard a guess not many at all especially against players ranked 50+ in the world.

This week has been better for him mentally and physically than 2010 when he played 2 five-setters in week one.

And the most impressive 4 set victory is when you win 3 straight sets.

Plus its great for the mind. What's Federer going to do if he wins the 1st set of his first 5 matches and then loses the 1st set vs Nadal? "God its killing" comes to mind.

Nadal and Federer might not even reach the semis.

Let's not get carried away.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Nadal and Federer might not even reach the semis.

Let's not get carried away.

I've already locked Nadal in for his 3rd Wimbledon trophy. Like I said before Wimbledon began, if Nadal reaches the 2nd week the title is his.

I have him locked in for a RU spot at best.

That's a fact.

So I take it you cannot recall the last time Rafa has dropped sets in all three of his first matches in a slam against such lowly-ranked players?

k_b_n if Murray had dropped sets in identical matches against those opponents he'd be getting slated but here you are trying to paint Rafa's showing as some sort of impressive feat. I cannot work that one out. Sorry.

I still dont see nadal beating murray or novak

as for federer, dont know... their head to head is so one sided, but on the other han, roger is looking great so far

Federer will be proud just to take a set from Nadal, after what we saw in Australia. And we can safely say Djokovic is gone mentally. Murray was making progress mentally until the disastrous French Open SF.

Nadal going for his 7th straight slam win in a row over Federer.
Nadal going for his 6th straight slam win in a row over Murray.
Nadal going for his 5th straight slam win in a row over Djokovic.

K_b_n : I think we've pretty much got the general drift of your perspective on the men's professional game, and its biggest participants.

Going forward, you could save yourself a lot of time (and your typing hand) by just modifying your user name to kneel_before_nadal_slag_off_everybody_else

kneel_before_nadal wrote:Federer will be proud just to take a set from Nadal, after what we saw in Australia. And we can safely say Djokovic is gone mentally. Murray was making progress mentally until the disastrous French Open SF.

Nadal going for his 7th straight slam win in a row over Federer.
Nadal going for his 6th straight slam win in a row over Murray.
Nadal going for his 5th straight slam win in a row over Djokovic.

Tennis experts watch tennis.
Do you watch tennis, or do you just look at numbers?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

kneel_before_nadal wrote:Federer will be proud just to take a set from Nadal, after what we saw in Australia. And we can safely say Djokovic is gone mentally. Murray was making progress mentally until the disastrous French Open SF.

Nadal going for his 7th straight slam win in a row over Federer.
Nadal going for his 6th straight slam win in a row over Murray.
Nadal going for his 5th straight slam win in a row over Djokovic.

Tennis experts watch tennis.
Do you watch tennis, or do you just look at numbers?

   

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry I don't see what you are getting at. Rosol, Klizan and Kukushkin are far lower ranked players than the heights reached by Haase, Petzchner, Haas and Hewitt. That being the case the fact they have each won a set off Rafa suggests strength of the era if anything.

Soderling and Kendrick come to mind as well. Nadal is always very nervous the first week, but match-hardened by the second week at SW19. The loss of sets in his first three matches is a result of that. Isner did it on Clay by hammering winners, as did Brands. Big-hitters on ANY surface take time away from his style. Djokovic becomes a mirror image of Nadal when playing him. Andujar had MPs against Nadal on Clay by hitting big. The ranking of the player has very little bearing on Nadal's fears.

In Murray's case, I think the first three matches have not given him the match-hardening that he needs for the second week. It is better to lose sets but win matches in the first week, because total energy required is less. Trying to do this in the second week is the edge of razor. The rankings are not that significantly different. BA's #23 is not that significant on Grass (despite the title) and LK seems to agree.

I want to gauge the Murray v Anderson for battle-fitness as he progresses further in the second week. Nadal is already getting cuts from his battles.

When the baseline turns to mud, Nadal will be ready to pulverize his opposition.

Djokovic v Stepanek makes me nervous for Djokovic. Simon takes up a lot of energy. Cilic and Tsonga are tough for him in the next two matches.

Murray is getting much less experienced players compared to Djokovic.

Nadal is also getting a similar set.

Federer will probably get Robredo and Wawrinka, two with a lot more experience.

Nadal is slowly ramping up, and any challenger to him, needs to do the same. If Murray wants this badly, he has his work cut out.

lags72 wrote:K_b_n : I think we've pretty much got the general drift of your perspective on the men's professional game, and its biggest participants.

Going forward, you could save yourself a lot of time (and your typing hand) by just modifying your user name to kneel_before_nadal_slag_off_everybody_else

But slag has lags in it, too.

Just kidding Lags.

Bolleli may take out Nishikori. , which takes away from who Nadal will face.

laverfan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry I don't see what you are getting at. Rosol, Klizan and Kukushkin are far lower ranked players than the heights reached by Haase, Petzchner, Haas and Hewitt. That being the case the fact they have each won a set off Rafa suggests strength of the era if anything.

Soderling and Kendrick come to mind as well. Nadal is always very nervous the first week, but match-hardened by the second week at SW19. The loss of sets in his first three matches is a result of that. Isner did it on Clay by hammering winners, as did Brands. Big-hitters on ANY surface take time away from his style. Djokovic becomes a mirror image of Nadal when playing him. Andujar had MPs against Nadal on Clay by hitting big. The ranking of the player has very little bearing on Nadal's fears.

In Murray's case, I think the first three matches have not given him the match-hardening that he needs for the second week. It is better to lose sets but win matches in the first week, because total energy required is less. Trying to do this in the second week is the edge of razor. The rankings are not that significantly different. BA's #23 is not that significant on Grass (despite the title) and LK seems to agree.

I want to gauge the Murray v Anderson for battle-fitness as he progresses further in the second week. Nadal is already getting cuts from his battles.

When the baseline turns to mud, Nadal will be ready to pulverize his opposition.

Djokovic v Stepanek makes me nervous for Djokovic. Simon takes up a lot of energy. Cilic and Tsonga are tough for him in the next two matches.

Murray is getting much less experienced players compared to Djokovic.

Nadal is also getting a similar set.

Federer will probably get Robredo and Wawrinka, two with a lot more experience.

Nadal is slowly ramping up, and any challenger to him, needs to do the same.  If Murray wants this badly, he has his work cut out.

The thing is I am not talking up Andy's chances. This year - aside from a run to the semis at RG has seen Andy striving for consistency and form so my hopes coming into Wimbledon especially after the disappointing showing at Queen's were not high. The year Andy has had so far this year then I'd say it is far better for him to have comfortable straight sets wins in the first week to build the confidence and belief. He will faces challenges to test his battle hardness next week such as Dimitrov and Djokovic (should he get that far) but at least he will be physically fresh. I am not even beginning to think of Andy defending the crown and Nadal possibly awaits should he make the final. Bad match-up for Andy and unless he adjusts his tactics and is more aggressive hitting hard and deep more regularly I cannot see him winning.

This is OT, but perhaps Murray needs a tough match in the next round. The schedule is alternate days in the first three rounds, so physical freshness (and mental freshness) is perhaps less of an issue. I would have preferred Murray playing a 4-5 setter with someone like Lopez or Nieminen in the first three rounds. Anderson should be good test where he is.

laverfan wrote:This is OT, but perhaps Murray needs a tough match in the next round. The schedule is alternate days in the first three rounds, so physical freshness (and mental freshness) is perhaps less of an issue. I would have preferred Murray playing a 4-5 setter with someone like Lopez or Nieminen in the first three rounds. Anderson should be good test where he is.

But does he need a tough test physically? Remember if he is to retain his crown he most likely will have to beat Dimitrov, Djokovic and Nadal in back-to-back matches so he will need to conserve as much energy as is possible for those matches in my opinion.

Nadal v Krygios. I like the young man. Let us see what he brings to battle.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

laverfan wrote:This is OT, but perhaps Murray needs a tough match in the next round. The schedule is alternate days in the first three rounds, so physical freshness (and mental freshness) is perhaps less of an issue. I would have preferred Murray playing a 4-5 setter with someone like Lopez or Nieminen in the first three rounds. Anderson should be good test where he is.

But does he need a tough test physically? Remember if he is to retain his crown he most likely will have to beat Dimitrov, Djokovic and Nadal in back-to-back matches so he will need to conserve as much energy as is possible for those matches in my opinion.

He needs a good test, even if it is less of a physical one. perhaps three close sets.

He has had mini-battles in his matches so far such as 7-5 set V Goffin and having to save break-points but nothing major. However, still signs of mental toughness.

laverfan wrote:Nadal v Krygios. I like the young man. Let us see what he brings to battle.

It will great to see a new face if Krygios could beat Nadal next round, I will become instant fan for saving Tennis   

invisiblecoolers wrote:

laverfan wrote:Nadal v Krygios. I like the young man. Let us see what he brings to battle.

It will great to see a new face if Krygios could beat Nadal next round, I will become instant fan for saving Tennis   

The Australian 19-year-old wildcard will have his work cut out though. He has already went through two five set matches.

I would be astounded if Krygios takes a set off him

CaledonianCraig wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

laverfan wrote:Nadal v Krygios. I like the young man. Let us see what he brings to battle.

It will great to see a new face if Krygios could beat Nadal next round, I will become instant fan for saving Tennis   

The Australian 19-year-old wildcard will have his work cut out though. He has already went through two five set matches.

Good part he gonna have 2 days off , that would recover the kid.   

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would be astounded if Krygios takes a set off him

Agreed.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would be astounded if Krygios takes a set off him

Agreed.

You guys are being a tad hasty, IMO. He beat Gasquet and Vesely. He is quite capable. Kukushkin was not expected to put up a fight either, but took a set off (but three breadsticks were ).

PS: He has played long matches, but only one five-setter.

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/players/overview/atpke17.html

laverfan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would be astounded if Krygios takes a set off him

Agreed.

You guys are being a tad hasty, IMO. He beat Gasquet and Vesely. He is quite capable. Kukushkin was not expected to put up a fight either, but took a set off (but three breadsticks were ).

PS: He has played long matches, but only one five-setter.

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/players/overview/atpke17.html

Not hasty.

I don't think he has played on any of the show courts at the Slams or played any of the big 4.

On top of the time on court he has had it is a massive adjustment to make.

You need a real set of brass balls if you are going to blast Nadal off the court in the 2nd week of a Slam.

Hope he doesnt repeat the Serbian Lajovic of FO, who impressed all through the tournament but Kneeled b4 Nadal on the encounter.

thing is, a lot of people expected BA to be a step-up for Murray in terms of opposition. He's a decent grasscourt player with a good record on the surface (IIRC he pushed Ferrer to 4 sets at Wimbledon last year, or maybe 2012, so he's clearly no mug). The fact that Murray dispatched him so convincingly has seen his stock drop, but for me he's still a pretty good player, just not in the same league as the top guys when they're on form.

I can't help but feel if Murray had faced Nadal's opposition and lost sets to them we'd be saying he'd have no chance against the likes of Djokovic and Nadal. For Nadal it's less important I agree, he tends to drop sets early on at slams (particularly Wimbledon) and I don't think it will have much bearing on his chances.

My general feeling from what I've seen is that Murray has looked the best player so far, by a decent margin, and I will stick to that. It doesn't mean Murray will win the tournament, far from it, but I do feel if Nadal had dispatched anyone the way Murray has done to his last two opponents, we'd be bandying words around like "ominous", etc. I think people need to realise that Murray on grass is a serious proposition, and if he's playing this well it will take a special performance to beat him.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:thing is, a lot of people expected BA to be a step-up for Murray in terms of opposition. He's a decent grasscourt player with a good record on the surface (IIRC he pushed Ferrer to 4 sets at Wimbledon last year, or maybe 2012, so he's clearly no mug). The fact that Murray dispatched him so convincingly has seen his stock drop, but for me he's still a pretty good player, just not in the same league as the top guys when they're on form.

I can't help but feel if Murray had faced Nadal's opposition and lost sets to them we'd be saying he'd have no chance against the likes of Djokovic and Nadal. For Nadal it's less important I agree, he tends to drop sets early on at slams (particularly Wimbledon) and I don't think it will have much bearing on his chances.

My general feeling from what I've seen is that Murray has looked the best player so far, by a decent margin, and I will stick to that. It doesn't mean Murray will win the tournament, far from it, but I do feel if Nadal had dispatched anyone the way Murray has done to his last two opponents, we'd be bandying words around like "ominous", etc. I think people need to realise that Murray on grass is a serious proposition, and if he's playing this well it will take a special performance to beat him.

I said that at 2012 before Olympics that he is the best player in the grass at the moment, when I margined as fav for 2013 Wimbledon, including you disagreed with me.

kyrgios is dangerous for nadal. why?

on grass just one little mistake and you miss a set. so the first danger is when you meet a guy who is unlikely to lose their serve, above all if you are having doubts with your own serve. and this happens to nadal a lot (against kukushkin at least he was not broken, but it was his serve which cost him the tie break)

as far as I know this kyrgios has a record of 76 aces in 3 matches, so nadal who fears big servers now faces the best one of the tournament so far (per his stats)

I like Kyrgios and I am looking forward to his match with Nadal.  He can hit big so he is the type of player who - when on song - could trouble Nadal.

All in all, I expect he will be too young and inexperienced to cause any real problems this time around, but it could be an interesting match-up nonetheless.

On a separate note, I am also glad that Kyrgios will now be ahead of Tomic in the rankings (Tomic will, BTW, drop out of top 100).

to be honest, I ve never seen kyrgios play. I just look at his stats and what people say. must watch some replays to know him a little