Rafael Nadal

[Kiefer]

Generalnie umówmy się, że Nadal część atutów traci przechodząc z clayu na mączkę, a jego rywale po prostu odwrotnie, żaden jednak z nich nie jest tak dobry na hardzie czy trawie jak Rafa na clayu. Bilans 7-8 zły nie jest, jest po prostu średni.

[Kamileki]

No bo jest znacznie słabsza. Tylko że to zasługa nie tego że jest tam słaby jak to malują niektórzy, ale tego jak mocarny jest na mączce. To trochę jak z aktorem serialowym czy takim z filmu znanego wszystkim. Rola ta stała się rolą życia, ale jednocześnie przekleństwem, które ciężko przełamać. Rafałowi się udało, a przynajmniej jest na dobrej drodze.

Pozycja Rafała poza cegłą jest wyraźnie słabsza - oczywiście, ale miałem na myśli że osoby oglądające tenisa od święta poprzez wieczne porównania do Feda i Novaka stwierdzą, że Nadal na hardzie/trawie jest po prostu przeciętny gdy tymczasem jego rezultaty na "słabszych" powierzchniach są same w sobie wyborne i lokują go bardzo wysoko.

Porównanie do ról w miarę dobre bo aktor też bardzo łatwo dostaje łatkę i nieraz musi się naprawdę napocić by zostać zapamiętany jako inny bohater. Np. kilka lat temu Keaton pozamiatał w Birdmanie i uciekł od wizerunku Batmana. Rafa zapewne musiałby wygrać raz jeszcze AO lub Wimbledon (najlepiej po finale z wiadomymi ludźmi) by ostatecznie wyjść z najbardziej znanej roli choć już to USO zrobiło dużo dobrego.

[Kiefer]

Nadal jest przecież zdecydowanie numerem trzy na hardzie w XXI wieku, reszta jest daleko w tyle, Murray wygrał bardzo dużo na turniejów na betonie, pewnie więcej niż Rafałek, ale szlem już tylko jeden, na trawie są na podobnym poziomie.

[Kamileki]

Nadal jest przecież zdecydowanie numerem trzy na hardzie w XXI wieku, reszta jest daleko w tyle, Murray wygrał bardzo dużo na turniejów na betonie, pewnie więcej niż Rafałek, ale szlem już tylko jeden, na trawie są na podobnym poziomie.

33 przy 21 Rafała. Ale kto na to patrzy skoro nawet Ty nie wiedziałeś Istotna jest jakość, a Rafał ma 5 Szlemów, 10 mastersów oraz olimpiadę na hardzie więc 16/21 zdobyczy na tej nawierzchni całkiem cenna. Wszystkie pięć wygranych kurników na hardzie miało miejsce w Azji - Pekin 2005 , Dubaj 2006, Tokio 2010, Doha 2014 i Pekin 2017. Równie dobrze mogłoby ich nie być i nic by to nie zmieniło w kontekście osiągów Nadala na tej nawierzchni. Pewnie tylko Dubaj jest w miarę kojarzony bo Fed ograny w finale.

[lake]

Niby tak, ale bilans finałów na hardzie mamy, no delikatnie mówiąc, średni. Oczywiście liczy się to co w plecaku, a tu historycznie wypadamy zdecydowanie lepiej niż Fedović na mączce. Na trawie przyzwoicie ale szału nie ma. Mniej więcej ten sam poziom osiągnięć co Fedović na mączce.

Keaton mnie rozwalił w Mężowie i żona. No i Andie Macdowell... eh piękne czasy.

[Kamileki]

Niby tak, ale bilans finałów na hardzie mamy, no delikatnie mówiąc, średni. Oczywiście liczy się to co w plecaku, a tu historycznie wypadamy zdecydowanie lepiej niż Fedović na mączce. Na trawie przyzwoicie ale szału nie ma. Mniej więcej ten sam poziom osiągnięć co Fedović na mączce.

Keaton mnie rozwalił w Mężowie i żona. No i Andie Macdowell... eh piękne czasy.

5 finałów Szlemów i 11 mastersów (w tym 2 kończące). Wychodzi, że w dużych finałach na twardej mamy bilans 16-16 czyli nie taki zły jak mogłoby się wydawać. Mamy - 5 bo w kurnikach jest za to zaszczytne 5-10, ale pewnie tego też nikt nie wie

Keaton to bardzo dobry aktor, miał chyba pecha do filmów i scenariuszy , ostatnio jest lepiej bo po Birdmanie było Spotlight czy McImperium. A Andie MacDowell, hmm nieco przypomina Xiscę

[lake]

Ewentualny, kolejny Szlem dla nas, to nie tylko, że będą wiedzieć, ale recytować obudzeni w nocy

[Kamileki]

Ewentualny, kolejny Szlem dla nas, to nie tylko, że będą wiedzieć, ale recytować obudzeni w nocy

Wszystkie demony został przebudzone. Wygrany decider w finale Szlema po 10 latach + bezrękawnik - to chyba wystarczy

[lake]

Karierowy w bezrękawniku by nie zaszkodził

[Kamileki]

Karierowy w bezrękawniku by nie zaszkodził

Jeśli będziemy sprawni to daję jeszcze dwie szanse - teraz i w 2021. Potem już chyba będzie za późno by myśleć o kolejnym AO.

[lake]

Optymistycznie. Jakby nie patrzeć w przyszłym roku naprawdę wchodzimy w niebezpieczny wiek. W takim RG np po ukończeniu 34 lat za wielu wygranych nie było.

[Kamileki]

Steve Flink, uznany amerykański dziennikarz i historyk sportowy twierdzi, że finał USO 2019 to jeden z najlepiej rozegranych meczy w historii nowojorskiego turnieju. Musimy zaprosić tego pana na nasze forum żeby wybić mu z głowy te herezje. Ogląda tenis ledwie od 1965 roku, jest autorem wielu książek w tym obszernych monografii dotyczących najlepszych tenisowych spotkań XX wieku oraz najlepszych spotkań wszechczasów. Z pewnością może się od nas wiele nauczyć o bialym sporcie, szczególnie jak odbierać postać Rafaela Nadala

Where does Nadal's US Open win over Medvedev rank among great matches?

Spoiler:

Over the course of his sterling career, Rafael Nadal has won 19 major titles, reached 27 Grand Slam finals, established himself as the mightiest competitor the game has yet known, and demonstrated a singularity of purpose in how he practices his craft. His combination of supreme physicality and incomparable mental toughness have made Nadal a universally revered sports figure. While Novak Djokovic has set himself apart as the nonpareil clutch competitor of his era, Nadal has been the sport’s most indefatigable fighter, the champion with the largest heart and the player fans have long embraced for his multitude of virtues.

As a reporter who has covered his entire career and seen him in so many trying situations, I have never admired Nadal more than I did while witnessing his harrowing five-set skirmish with Daniil Medvedev in the US Open final. This contest will live long in my imagination.

Through the years, Nadal has played only six finals that have gone the full five sets at the majors, and all have been memorable. He lost to Roger Federer in the 2007 Wimbledon final, then upended the Swiss the following year on the same fabled court in London. He has played three five-setters in the finals of the Australian Open—surpassing Federer again in a 2009 dandy, losing to Djokovic in a five-hour, 53 minute epic three years later, and falling to Federer in a 2017 blockbuster. In his 2012 collision with Djokovic, Nadal led 4-2, 30-15 in the final set; in 2017, the Spaniard was ahead of the Swiss 3-1 in the fifth and had a game point for 4-2.

But his match with Medvedev marked the first time Nadal had contested a five-set final in New York. Nadal was not simply fighting to overcome a rival who has moved rapidly into the forefront of the game, but the Spaniard was battling to defeat his inner demons.


Getty Images

The 19-time Grand Slam champion is an unassailable front runner, one of the best the game has ever seen. He stands at No. 2 on the Open Era rankings list of players with the best record after winning the first set, boasting am 854-46 (.949) mark. Djokovic is at the top at 769 matches won against only 35 losses (.956).

And so the Spaniard was already a good bet to beat Medvedev when he came from a break down to win the first set of their compelling final. Nadal took the second set on one break to lead two sets to love. When he went up a break in the third, serving for a 4-2 lead, he seemed certain to prevail.

It was at that precise juncture that Nadal made life difficult for himself and his legion of loyal boosters. His apprehension in that sixth game of the third set was unmistakable. A double fault put him down 15-40. He recovered to reach deuce and had Medvedev on the run, only to mishandle a high forehand volley down the line, sending it wide.

The Spaniard was broken there, but he had a break point at 4-4. He approached the net, and Medvedev lofted a high lob off the forehand down the line. Nadal backtracked, took it on the bounce, but inexplicably netted his normally trustworthy smash. He dropped that set but had some openings in the fourth—including two break points for 3-2—which he did not convert. Serving at 4-5, Nadal was ahead 40-15 but erred off the forehand an open court. Medvedev took the next three points. It was two sets all.

The fifth set brought more emotional hardship to Nadal. He saved three break points in the second game, erasing the last one after a time violation forced him to start the point with a second serve. From there, he performed dynamically to secure a pair of service breaks and a 5-2 lead. But despite a 30-15 lead in the eighth game, he was broken. At 30-40, he was hit with another time violation, and double faulted. Nevertheless, he had two match points in the following game, but Medvedev laced a two-hander down the line for a stunning winner, and then caught Nadal off-guard by coming in on his second serve.


And so Nadal served for the match a second time, and once more he danced into dangerous territory. A mishit forehand wide from him gave Medvedev a break point for 5-5. But Nadal was courageous when he needed to be. Je missed his first serve but approached from a deep position behind an inside out forehand and Medvedev lobbed long. Then Nadal sent an impeccable drop shot down the line off the forehand, which Medvedev could not answer. Finally, on his third match point, Nadal cracked a first serve at 124 M.P.H. down the T, eliciting a return error from Medvedev. With both tenacity and temerity, Nadal won, 7-5, 6-3, 5-7, 4-6, 6-4.

It was reminiscent in some ways of the 2008 Wimbledon final, when Nadal led two sets to love over Federer and the Swiss served at 3-3, 0-40 in the third. Federer boldly held on and won the set in a tie-break. In the fourth set tie-break, Nadal had two match points, but Federer gallantly escaped. Nadal was in some precarious corners before taking the fifth set, holding on from 3-4, 30-40 and again from 4-5, 30-30. He prevailed 6-4, 6-4, 6-7 (5), 6-7 (9), 9-7.

The most revealing and fascinating comment made by Nadal in his press conference following a nearly five-hour confrontation with Medvedev was when he was asked if he had ever thought the match could “go the wrong way.” Nadal was typically forthright: “Did I think I was going to lose? Of course, when you have breakpoint against you in the beginning of the fifth, losing the last two sets before that, you are in trouble. But I was really trying to avoid this thought. I always believed that I was going to keep having chances. That’s the way I approach it. But I always was in front of the score until the end. It is difficult for me to think I am going to lose.”


Getty Images

Refusing to consider losing may have ultimately won the match for him. To be sure, he did it the hard way, but Medvedev threw a surprisingly versatile game plan at Nadal. The Russian went to the serve-and-volley on very big points, as was the case at match point down with a second serve. He opened up the court beautifully with sharply angled crosscourt forehands, forcing the Spaniard to resort to his slice backhand more often than he would have liked. He drove his two-hander down the line with interest, surprising Nadal with the frequency of that tactic. And by varying his game so skillfully, Medvedev did not allow Nadal to dictate off the forehand as regularly as the Spaniard normally does. He made Nadal uncomfortable at times by going against the grain and attacking with admirable persistence.

Nadal also came forward unhesitatingly, which was not surprising. He won 17 of 20 serve-and-volley points, while Medvedev took 22 of 29 when going in on his serve. Altogether, Nadal won 51 of 66 net points, while Medvedev succeeded on 50 of 74 on his journeys to the forecourt.

It was arguably the best played US Open final ever. Since 1968, there have been only nine finals that have been settled in five sets, including a classic John McEnroe-Bjorn Borg 1980 meeting. But the Nadal-Medvedev contest was the finest sustained level of play in any of those finals.

The greatest match I have ever seen at the Open in any round was the Pete Sampras-Andre Agassi quarterfinal played in 2001 under the lights featuring four tiebreaks and no service breaks. Sampras came from behind to win in four scintillating sets. Jimmy Connors eclipsing Bjorn Borg in an enthralling 1976 four-set final was a beauty as well. And the back-to-back Djokovic semifinal triumphs over Federer when the Serbian came from double match point down in both 2010 and 2011 were standouts.

But this much is certain: Nadal had to find a way to win this epic. He had last lost from two sets to love up against Fabio Fognini in the third round of the 2015 US Open. The indignity of losing a two-set lead had last happened to him in 2005 against Federer in the final of Miami. Had this one gotten away from Nadal, he would have dealt with it even-handedly and moved on. But it would have lingered unhappily in his mind and haunted him for a while.


Getty Images

Instead, he can celebrate a hard-earned win that puts him only one major shy of Federer. Nadal will surely win at least one more French Open, and he will have opportunities at the three other Grand Slam tournaments over the next couple of years. The view here is that he will eventually pass Federer, although the Swiss will be a prime contender next year at three of the four majors. Meanwhile, Djokovic is one year younger than Nadal, and I believe he will pass Federer as well if his shoulder injury is not too serious.

Like Djokovic, Nadal needs to avoid playing too many tournaments between now and the 2020 Australian Open. The 33-year-old Spaniard is way ahead of Djokovic in the ATP Race to London, with 9,225 points. (Djokovic is in second place at 7,265.) Neither man will be obsessed with finishing the year at No. 1 in the world, but they have split the four majors and will sorely want the reward of officially standing as the best player of the season.

For the time being, Nadal will be very content with a stellar run which brought him an exhilarating fourth US Open crown. At 33, he is the second oldest man to capture the US Open, surpassed in age only by 35-year-old Ken Rosewall in 1970. Nadal took his first title at the start of the decade in 2010 and now has been triumphant in the last edition. The 19-time Grand Slam champion will cherish his latest victory forever.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2019/09/ ... ive/84868/

[Kamileki]

Pierwszy punkt na Garrosie:

[Kamileki]

[Kamileki]

Rafael Nadal will retire when he cannot win anymore, says uncle Toni

Spoiler:

Rafael Nadal's uncle Toni spoke about the Spanish player's consistency and future. Toni said: "Rafa has been winning Majors every year since 2005 except 2015 and 2016. The day where Rafael feels he cannot win, that day he will retire, but we have not spoken about it."

On his mentality, Toni added: "I think you need to put a bit of pressure on people, in life there is always pressure, like when you go to school and your parents put pressure on you to be better. Things you learn are not necessarily fun, sometimes the learning process is not funny and you struggle going through it.

You consistently need to enjoy yourself, it coincides with perseverance because you cannot always do the easiest things. Rafa got used to things not being easy, he got used to appreciate the good things and that's the key of success with him.

For him when he was younger, it was more difficult to train with me than playing a final." On Robert Farah and Juan Sebastian Cabal winning Wimbledon and reaching US Open final, Toni added: "They are very good people like the majority of Colombians.

They took the opportunity they had." Toni also spoke about his role as the Head Director at the Rafa Nadal Academy: "I tell the kids we have in the Academy that not everyone can be a Roger Federer, a Novak Djokovic, Nadal or Messi, but by training everyone can be the best out of ourselves."

On the US Open final win over Daniil Medvedev, he concluded: "It was one of the best matches I saw of my nephew."

https://www.tennisworldusa.org/tennis/n ... ncle-toni/

[Kamileki]

[Kamileki]

[Kamileki]

[lake]

Nie chcą pary puścić, gdzie zagra po LC. Czekają na ruch Nole, czy chcą sprawdzić jak się zachowa organizm w trybie meczowym?

[Kamileki]

Nie chcą pary puścić, gdzie zagra po LC. Czekają na ruch Nole, czy chcą sprawdzić jak się zachowa organizm w trybie meczowym?

Pewnie jedno i drugie. Gramy obecnie w szachy i mamy sporą przewagę na planszy