Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arnab
The difference is Federer clearly wasted these breakpoint opportunities with unforced errors, whereas last year Federer saved the breakpoints opportunities Nadal got against him. It's on Federer's racket most of the time.
Erm, the grass WAS fast in Wim 2001. Ivanisevic won it that year, remember?
|
The balls were changed. They started to test new grass the year before actually.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arnab
But remember Federer was up 4-2 in the second set. He could have won the second set and the entire match would have been different had that happened.
|
Again we are going in to the grey terretory. Ifs, buts doesn't matter. Nadal played a game according to his game plan and beat the current World #1 and 5 time defending champion, with a consecutive winning record of 40 alone in this tournament and 65 in Grass overall. That is enough to say how good Nadal played.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arnab
People are saying if the fifth set went to a tiebreaker, Federer probably would have won. Nadal's tiebreaker records are worse than Federer's.
|
People like John McEnroe (a devoted Federer fan) can say whatever they want. Fact of the matter is, one has to play by the rules. I say, had there been no rain interruptions, the game would have been over in three sets. 4 max. No way Federer had the
stamina to continue to dual with Nadal. The rain interruptions allowed Federer to breathe and not get burried in a one sided match.
And head to head yes, Federer may have an edge on Nadal but in tiebreakers Nadal is almost close to flawless against anyone else. He faced
three tiebreaker sets in this wimbledon before the finals. The highest points one could muster was 3. That even getting a 6-0 lead. He has started to play the big points much better and very focused.