Only Ferrer can Beat Nadal - Nadal makes a mince meat of Ferrer

First topic message reminder :

Ferrer's display of tennis was utter awesome, known for his fighting spirit he is playing with something to prove and in a form of life .

Its Vintage Rafa against Spirited Ferrer, Ferrer is the only guy capable of beating this Rafa at this current tournament, if Ferrer lets it go it could well be 7th RG title for Rafa.

Djokovic and Federer had a tough QF unlike Rafa, and one of them will be knocked out in the semi, on the other hand this Rafa would have knocked either of them out if he had to face them in the semi, so Djoko and Fed should have nothing to complain as Nadal will take a form beast in the semi.

For Djoko/Fed do the business in the semi and expect Ferrer to do the business in the other one, most likely Ferrer will do it.
Fed/Djoko fans should be happy that neither of their hero have to take on Rafa in the semi, so if Djoko or Fed cannot win the respective semi they simply dont deserve the title, the draw cannot become better for them now.

4 best players in the semi [nothing against Murray, but on clay Ferrer is miles ahead of him].

Go Ferrer go.

Edit -- Interesting lines in RG website - http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/news/articles/2012-06-07/201206071339090169485.html


Ask anyone here at Roland Garros how they see Rafael Nadal’s semi-final against David Ferrer turning out, and there isn’t too much variation in the replies. This answer is reasonably typical: “I think you can win a set from Rafa, but there is a difference between winning a set and winning a match. Winning a match against Rafa is almost impossible.” Sounds about right. So who spoke those words? Step forward David Ferrer, assessing his own task in the last four against his good friend Rafa Nadal.

----
Update

Nadal makes a mince meat of David Ferrer, Ferrer came up with his B-game and Nadal played his A-game in the first set after its was 2-2 which means a disaster for Ferrer and thats what happened in the end.

I for once thought Ferrer goes into the game with positive mind set, but he bowed down once he saw the glimse of Nadal's A-game. Well done David Ferrer for sticking with your words and an impressive fight.

Poor Nadal didnt even get a practice match before the finals, this is unfair on Nadal, he is now asked to defend his crown without even a practice match.

It Must Be Love wrote:

As for the match tomorrow I believe Ferrer can win, but he is not favourite and faces a tough challenge as long as Nadal is fully fit.

Why this qualification? He has played his previous five matches and won in straight sets. Is his fitness still in question?

In 2012, Barcelona F was a close call at 7-6(1), 7-5 , Ferrer lost it coz Nadal played the crucial points better, not cause Ferrer ran out of breath.

No Lydian said it was 11-0 since 2007 if we ignore the AO 2010. If we include it, it is 11-1.
At no point did he say Nadal only loses when he is injured. So you still haven't given me any names- are you sure these people aren't a myth.

laverfan wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

As for the match tomorrow I believe Ferrer can win, but he is not favourite and faces a tough challenge as long as Nadal is fully fit.

Why this qualification? He has played his previous five matches and won in straight sets. Is his fitness still in question?

Who knows what could happen? He could hurt his toe.

invisiblecoolers wrote:In 2012, Barcelona F was a close call at 7-6(1), 7-5 , Ferrer lost it coz Nadal played the crucial points better, not cause Ferrer ran out of breath.

Yes, same as first set of Rome

It Must Be Love wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:In 2012, Barcelona F was a close call at 7-6(1), 7-5 , Ferrer lost it coz Nadal played the crucial points better, not cause Ferrer ran out of breath.

Yes, same as first set of Rome

The second set in Rome was anticlimactic, 6-0.

Yes but if Ferrer had won the 1st set it would have been different

laverfan wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

As for the match tomorrow I believe Ferrer can win, but he is not favourite and faces a tough challenge as long as Nadal is fully fit.

Why this qualification? He has played his previous five matches and won in straight sets. Is his fitness still in question?

LF you putting their brains into serious puzzle .

IC...this is like arguing with a wall - you're not really receiving what I'm saying with the intent I mean it.
Instead you wish to jumpt to the conclusion of me as some worshipper.
That just switches me off instantly. I dont excuse every Nadal loss...indeed I've been highly critical of him on here after some losses.
But AO11 is a case apart. And you were the one pinning your case on it as being relevant. My argument is it isnt because Nadal was effectively on one leg! Call that an excuse if you like!
But you fail to see that Ferrer himself said it wasnt really a victory.
So why are we even arguing the toss on this?
If you want to say Ferrer's 4 wins are relevant then fine, thats your opinion.
Clearly you must feel Ferrer beating Nadal as a 17 yr old on clay has bearing on the match tomorrow.
I dont. Neither does the AO11 win. Neither does the USO07 win. In my opinion.

Yes, we all agree Ferrer is a threat...for a set, maybe even 2.
Yes he's fit, very fit, but he will run more than Nadal due to Nadal's superior groundstrokes and use of angles.
Yes he has a chance. But he needs to play the match of his life and hope Nadal is off-form.
IMO Nadal will eventually pull away as the pressure mounts - he always does with Ferrer.

Remember...the last set they played was 2 weeks ago, on similar clay, and it went 6-0 to Nadal. 6-0.
You dont think that will be on Ferrer's mind along with nerves at being in a semi and all the other losses to Nadal?
Remember also what Ferrer said after that AO11 win..."I got lucky".
What does that tell you about the way he normally feels his chances against are?
Lets just enjoy the match and see...

It Must Be Love wrote:No Lydian said it was 11-0 since 2007 if we ignore the AO 2010. If we include it, it is 11-1.
At no point did he say Nadal only loses when he is injured. So you still haven't given me any names- are you sure these people aren't a myth.

He keeps giving excuses for every Nadal loss to Ferrer rather than accpeting Ferrer was the better man on the given day, to back up his lame arguments he forgets everything before 2007, should we cancel all of Nadal's Grandslam wins before 2007 and say Nadal as a 7 time GS champ since 2007 , stop being crazy IMBL in trying to defend Lyd lame arguments.

lydian wrote:
If you want to say Ferrer's 4 wins are relevant then fine, thats your opinion.

Thats not my opinion, thats the fact, Ao 2011 Ferrer beats Nadal .

Yes we got two great semi's in cards, and its time to sit watch and enjoy rather than saying Ferrer just cannot win Nadal, Nadal is the better player and goes in to the match as an ultra favorite , but Ferrer is capable of an upset but whether he will do or not only time will say. , but if he wins he deserves it and I hope some don't come up with an injury excuse if the result doesn't bound to go their way.

lydian wrote:
Remember also what Ferrer said after that AO11 win..."I got lucky".
What does that tell you about the way he normally feels his chances against are?
Lets just enjoy the match and see... :OK

Nadal says that before every match start that he is the underdog , but is that really the case? its the exact same, Ferrer want to comfort his friend after the win and gave some kind words.

Anyways Ferrer might be lucky, I am not disputing that, but Ferrer played better than Nadal and deserved the win, there is a saying in English " Fortune favors the brave" Ferrer was brave that day and fortune favored him, whats wrong in it.

IC...obviously the man who wins on the day is the 'better' player.
That day.
But you're just simplfying the argument into banality.
Why not consider the reasons behind losses, or their relevance (or non-) to future match-ups?
In doing so, and looking at the whole H2H and their careers to date, a bigger picture emerges that is better at predicting future events.
Seems to me that you feel those 4 'better man on the day' wins give Ferrer a massive chance against Nadal tomorrow.
I dont. Simple as.

invisiblecoolers wrote:
He keeps giving excuses for every Nadal loss to Ferrer rather than accpeting Ferrer was the better man on the given day, to back up his lame arguments he forgets everything before 2007, should we cancel all of Nadal's Grandslam wins before 2007 and say Nadal as a 7 time GS champ since 2007 , stop being crazy IMBL in trying to defend Lyd lame arguments.

No Lydian said and I quote exactly 'USO 2007 doesn't have a bearing on the match tomorrow.' Yes clearly Lydian's arguments are very lame here lol

invisiblecoolers wrote:rather than saying Ferrer just cannot win Nadal

I've never said "cannot".
Dont put words into my mouth please.

Enjoy the match

@ Lyd

This is what called improper reading and jumping to the extend to defend your arguments.

In this entire thread I said Nadal is in Vintage form and he is the King of clay and its not gonna be easy for Ferrer to beat him, but he is the better equipped guy to do so in this tournament considering his form, belief and stamina. This doesn't mean Ferrer gonna beat Nadal, but he is capable of the upset .

lydian wrote:

Remember also what Ferrer said after that AO11 win..."I got lucky".
What does that tell you about the way he normally feels his chances against are?
Lets just enjoy the match and see... :OK

Nadal says that before every match start that he is the underdog , but is that really the case? its the exact same, Ferrer want to comfort his friend after the win and gave some kind words.

Anyways Ferrer might be lucky, I am not disputing that, but Ferrer played better than Nadal and deserved the win, there is a saying in English " Fortune favors the brave" Ferrer was brave that day and fortune favored him, whats wrong in it.

invisiblecoolers wrote:This is what called improper reading and jumping to the extend to defend your arguments

Oh the irony.

we done now?

Butt Scratcher!!!!!!!

invisiblecoolers wrote:

lydian wrote:Aggressive? lol. Perhaps you would like being called "a core worshipper" when all you did was simply repeat something that was commonly accepted fact and reported as such clearly and widely both in immediate post-match, on-court interviews and subsequently by other observers in the media? As you watched the AO11 match you'll have clearly heard Ferrer say in the interview afterwards....

Thats the respect Ferrer gives to his opponents, but you robbed Ferrer's win by citing thats the only reason he won, I see that as worshiper finding excuse for his/her hero's loss.

On that day Ferrer would have won Rafa whether he was injured or not, that was the performance of Ferrer on that day, and to still claim he can't win was just a rubbish excuse.

I don't mind even if you say Ferrer have no chance come Friday , that's entirely your opinion which is fine and perfectly acceptable, but to say what a result happened in the past is asterisked is ultra kiddish.

I don't think anyone is saying the result is asterisked. However it IS common sense to look into any match in the past when trying to figure out some ones chances in a match (especially if you plan to put money on it). In that instance Nadal clearly injured himself early on and tried to play on because he didn't want to retire like vs Murray previously. This was well documented at the time, and to accuse Nadal of being a drama queen is frankly laughable and childish. Especially when the real-life recorded interviews show him trying hard not to take anything away from Ferrer, whom he clearly respects and equally Ferrer tried to play down the win due to the injury. The fact that Nadal did not retire immediately is indicative of some one not creating drama around an incident - rolling around on the floor in apparent agony like many pro footballers IS imo acting like a drama queen.

Another article:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/archives/old-sport-pages/rafael-nadal-flies-home-for-scans-on-injured-hamstring/story-fn77kxzt-1225995719044

The fact really does remain that if Ferrer were to somehow beat a healthy Nadal tomorrow, it would be one of the games hugest shocks for some time. However quite probably it would be Nadal who would be one of the first to congratulate Ferrer on a great victory. I guess some people don't think Nadal is genuine when he congratulates some one who beats him - to be honest, i think that's just sad for those people

It would be nice if fans of receptive players had as much respect for one another as the players do - quite clearly many of them, even at the top are really good mates. E.g. Its even clear Ferrer has a lot of time for Murray - a relationship i had hardly considered previously

Tom_____ wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It would be nice if fans of receptive players had as much respect for one another as the players do - quite clearly many of them, even at the top are really good mates. E.g. Its even clear Ferrer has a lot of time for Murray - a relationship i had hardly considered previously

Why can't you follow your own words before advising the rest, where is Nadal fans showing respect to Ferrer wins?
Btw the argument was stamina and not the game, to jump into the discussion without following it up properly sounds silly. I have used AO 2011 and USO 2007 and other matches to describe Ferrer's stamina and not the game.

If you can call Serana the drama queen for the same issue of Nadal thats complete bais , it just makes me think of your vague argument.

Tom_____ wrote:
I don't think anyone is saying the result is asterisked.

So why not accept Ferrer won rather than mourning

Tom_____ wrote:
However it IS common sense to look into any match in the past when trying to figure out some ones chances in a match (especially if you plan to put money on it).

oh Mr.Tom the common sense why don't you look into other factors like Ferrer's current form, belief and his stamina level ?

Between do you read the article properly? Its just a common sense to understand I said Nadal might win it but if there is one guy who can stop it its Ferrer who is better equipped in this current tournament. Strange for a common sense guy to apply common sense to read the article and follow up the discussion rather than shouting.

On 606v2, I have seen the argument that Nadal was maturing on HC circa 2007 USO, yet I also have read the statement that Nadal beat Federer in Miami 2004 on HC, and beat Federer in Dubai 2006, again on HC. Ferrer also beat Nadal in TMC 2007.

My concept of 'maturity' seems to be at odds with the definition and meaning of the word. I need to go back to the English language dictionary.

These wins may have no bearing on tomorrow's match on Clay, which is my argument as well, that each match is different.

As Lydian says, I will enjoy the match, no matter what the result is going to be. May the better player win!

Exactly , may the better player win, and please give credit to the winner rather than excuses, lets act as grown up men.

Tom

Laver, indeed My thread is up with a preview
Well sort of a preview, you'll understand when you read it.

Tom_____ wrote:... Its even clear Ferrer has a lot of time for Murray - a relationship i had hardly considered previously

Murray did train in Spain quite a bit during his early years and should have a good relationship with the Spanish players who are his peers.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Exactly , may the better player win, and please give credit to the winner rather than excuses, lets act as grown up men.

What about the women folk, IC?

hawkeye wrote:invisiblecoolers

My post was a response to laverfan who said she would love Ferrer to get to the final even if he meant he would come away with the runners up trophy.

Of course all 4 players still have a chance of winning... how big a chance is open to debate.

Yup hawk

laverfan wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:Exactly , may the better player win, and please give credit to the winner rather than excuses, lets act as grown up men.

What about the women folk, IC?

I knew somebody gonna come up with it

invisiblecoolers wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

It would be nice if fans of receptive players had as much respect for one another as the players do - quite clearly many of them, even at the top are really good mates. E.g. Its even clear Ferrer has a lot of time for Murray - a relationship i had hardly considered previously

Why can't you follow your own words before advising the rest, where is Nadal fans showing respect to Ferrer wins?
Btw the argument was stamina and not the game, to jump into the discussion without following it up properly sounds silly. I have used AO 2011 and USO 2007 and other matches to describe Ferrer's stamina and not the game.

If you can call Serana the drama queen for the same issue of Nadal thats complete bais , it just makes me think of your vague argument.

Tom_____ wrote:
I don't think anyone is saying the result is asterisked.

So why not accept Ferrer won rather than mourning

Tom_____ wrote:
However it IS common sense to look into any match in the past when trying to figure out some ones chances in a match (especially if you plan to put money on it).

oh Mr.Tom the common sense why don't you look into other factors like Ferrer's current form, belief and his stamina level ?

Between do you read the article properly? Its just a common sense to understand I said Nadal might win it but if there is one guy who can stop it its Ferrer who is better equipped in this current tournament. Strange for a common sense guy to apply common sense to read the article and follow up the discussion rather than shouting.

Hmmm i do look at all the other attributes of a player when considering their chances - however i'm just responding to the match you yourself were already focusing on at length in many posts - so thats your doing to be honest and its ruined this thread.

Overall your being very childish here, spouting a lot of things i hadn't even talked about as if i fall on the other side of the fence when i hadn't even tried to discuss them. I think Ferrer is an excellent, highly fit player with great strength on clay and i accept he deserved all his wins. However i'm not going to respond to you further here, as i think you know you have lost the argument and have become increasingly offensive.

I'm looking forward to both matches tomorrow.

Tom_____ wrote:

Hmmm i do look at all the other attributes of a player when considering their chances - however i'm just responding to the match you yourself were already focusing on at length in many posts - so thats your doing to be honest and its ruined this thread.

Overall your being very childish here, spouting a lot of things i hadn't even talked about as if i fall on the other side of the fence when i hadn't even tried to discuss them. I think Ferrer is an excellent, highly fit player with great strength on clay and i accept he deserved all his wins. However i'm not going to respond to you further here, as i think you know you have lost the argument and have become increasingly offensive.

I'm looking forward to both matches tomorrow.

Your sense of humor is good, how am I aggressive, Lyd used some aggressive words you discard it safely again, you intially claimed Ferrer's win as deemed as Nadal was injured, and now says he deserved his wins, and still I lost my arguments right .

There is no need to get aggressive Tom, this is just a discussion, if you cannot follow up properly its wise to stay away from it, from that point I welcome your move to stay away from this thread. I don't need to get aggressive as no one abused me even though some of them made funny posts, you don't get aggressive for funny posts. May be you taking Nadal's loss so personal that you find it difficult to even think of his loss let alone argue about it, I understand it .

Anyone who genuinely thinks Ferrer has a chance to win tomorrow needs to wake up quickly.

IC...
I dont care for being labelled either a worshipper or being aggressive. It seems you like to quickly label people who dont agree with you but then dont like the responses and act subsequently offended when people are negative to you.

All because you wouldnt accept the comments that Nadal and Ferrer himself made post-match AO11, a match that YOU brought up to support your argument. The players own comments clearly exposed your argument about AO11 being won on stamina as incorrect. You could have just admitted the error but instead of accepting that you said I was a worshipper who was making and I quote "lame excuses" for Nadal's losses. It seems to me you were the one initiating and propagating the aggressive responses resulting in this thread going pear-shaped.

And now you expect posters to have a sense of humour even though your post above to Tom then ends in sarcasm. I think you should stop further digging yourself into a hole. This was meant to be a debate on Ferrer's chances, people dont respect being negatively labelled (or labelled at all) when they offer a contrary opinion backed up by references and evidence for the very match you brought up to support his chances.

@ Lyd

Again the same problem with u, I didnt say posters need to have sense of humor , I said some of the comments you made were laughable. There is a big difference, its just another example you and your fellow friend jumped violent on discussion rather than following it up properly.

Between there are several guys here think Ferrer has no chance, like for instance Socal , Chyd etc,. I got no problems with it, its a welcome opinion.

Unlike you they never got aggressive , they never discredited Ferrer's win over Nadal with excuses, its you with your lame arguments digging yourself into a hole. I have stood with my arguments and they are facts that Ferrer beat Nadal in slams and on both days Ferrer was the better player on that given day.

So stop mourning and jump at other just cause they prove your arguments wrong, you don't need to get violent for it, discussions and arguments can always go in civilized manner.

My post at 15:52 on Page 2 sums the debate up for me.
Anyway labelling people is not good either way.

Chydremion wrote:Anyone who genuinely thinks Ferrer has a chance to win tomorrow needs to wake up quickly.

, I still like to dream.

It Must Be Love wrote:My post at 15:52 on Page 2 sums the debate up for me.
Anyway labelling people is not good either way.

Thats been addressed on the same page , not just by me .

Discrediting somebodies win is not good either way.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Butt Scratcher!!!!!!!

dont start that again!

coss if ya start me up, if you start me up I'll never stop, if you start me up, if you start me up I'll never stop!

......
You make a grown man cry!! You make a grown man cry!!! You make a grown man cry
Spread out the oil, the gasoline
I walk smooth, ride in a mean, mean MMAAACCCHHIINNNEEEEE
Start it up!!!!

Stick a fork in me, I'm done...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD61Io_auTs

chill Lyd, a loss is not the end of life.

Rather than sticking the fork I would do thid

https://youtu.be/PWXigjFm4TM

IC...like the glass of wine I'm sipping I've been chilled all along...its just a forum right?

Bon chance to Ferrer, he'll need it

lydian wrote:IC...like the glass of wine I'm sipping I've been chilled all along...its just a forum right?

Bon chance to Ferrer, he'll need it

Thats nice to hear, and thats how an argument have to end , I take red wine, I love it.

Thread summary:

Opinion 1: Ferrer has a chance.
Opinion 2: Ferrer has no chance.
Reality: Ferrer will lose unless Nadal breaks his leg.
Reality: Nadal will win Roland Garros unless SuperNovak turns up.

Thread closed

Fair assessment. You sure know how to kill the romance chydremion

Actually there's another way Rafa loses it.

If the court is not just damp but really soggy the bounce drops. Then a certain backhand I know of has balls coming into its hitting zone.

Just pointing it out, that's all.

Just a few hours to go. The FFT is still skittish about publishing the Schedule of Play, but pretty sure all the broadcasters already know.

Chydremion wrote:Thread summary:

Opinion 1: Ferrer has a chance.
Opinion 2: Ferrer has no chance.
Reality: Ferrer will lose unless Nadal breaks his leg.
Reality: Nadal will win Roland Garros unless SuperNovak turns up.

Thread closed

, well Ferrer will break Nadal's leg

@ LF

I guess its gonna be 2 PM start with Nadal-Ferrer in the court first.

Nadal on first. I'm surprised.

Yep BB, I made exactly similar point elsewhere Re: Feds BH being ok with Djokovic tomorrow also if it's damp/cool as forecasted. Plus Fed's 5000rpm BH slice will cut like a knife on that surface and Djokovic is vulnerable to that at times. Sunday is similar forecast. It also means Djokovic won't be able to hit as many winners past Fed...Rafa relies on different tactic, and it's not all good news for Fed or Novak whoever meets him as Rafa's spin will really bite into dampish clay and drive forwards...angled shots will be a nightmare to reach, as Ferrer will find tomorrow.

Well the last thing Ferrer wants his conditions to be against him, he needs a favorable condition and Nadal to be knackered a bit.

This is what Ferrer said about his task in hand when asked about the semi-final

Interesting lines in RG website - http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/news/articles/2012-06-07/201206071339090169485.html


Ask anyone here at Roland Garros how they see Rafael Nadal’s semi-final against David Ferrer turning out, and there isn’t too much variation in the replies. This answer is reasonably typical: “I think you can win a set from Rafa, but there is a difference between winning a set and winning a match. Winning a match against Rafa is almost impossible.” Sounds about right. So who spoke those words? Step forward David Ferrer, assessing his own task in the last four against his good friend Rafa Nadal.

I think it IS clear cut. Nadal has a lot of prove which is why he has upped his game to a whole new level, something I thought is not possible. The draw has been very easy and the last time it was this easy was at the USO in 2010.

The Spanish players find it very hard to beat Nadal even if they have the ability because they respect him too much. Its like Federer and the Swiss players or Djokovic and the Serbs on tour. I think the first set will be competitive and upon losing it, Ferrer will get down on himself as happened in Rome. Anyone who thinks Ferrer can beat Nadal is way off the mark. If he gets a set he will be lucky.

Djoko's losses to Nadal on clay this year surely will have affected his confidence and belief unless he can turn it around. With the court playing very slow and the new balls being softer he or anyone who plays Nadal will struggle as the free points on serve will be less.

I want to see Fed in the final but I don't want to see another predictable match up as we have seen in the past at RG (last year Roger blew it big time!). Having Djoko there may leave it slightly more interesting but Im sure many Nadal supporters would rather see Fed take care of Novak!