plath and bonofans pilgrimage into tennis (and how we converted our friends along the way)

Friday, June 09, 2006

Day 13: Clash of the Titans

Well, we waited patiently for thirteen days, and it's finally come true: a dream lineup of nadal and federer in the french open final!

I haven't been this torn since my first day of cable: I really want rafael to win, because, well, i adore the guy to death basically - yet I want roger to win because I want him to complete his grand slam (that's winning four grand slams in a row, which only two other men in history have done).

Plus, I think federer deserves it in some surreal way - hes not run away from clay like sampras did - he fought his brick-red demons face on: he's played all the right tourneys, has put in all the right practice hours and has shown all the resilience that makes him 3000+ points ahead of the nearest competitor.

And Rafa's not had a great week - these past few matches he's not played like the Oh-Yeah-Baby-This-Thing-Is-What-I-Was-Waiting-For tennis we've gotten used to - it's as if these past few days he's played to "not lose" instead of "to win". He's been more vulnerable then I can ever remember and that scares me!

An important factoid: both of them have played three times this year, with the Spaniard coming out the better all three times. Roger just has a huge mental hurdle overcoming Nadal. In my opinion, the recent Rome Masters final, one of nadal's best performance ever, pretty much showed that federer's just that tiny bit hesitant when it comes to nadal. And mind you, ONLY nadal. The rest of tennis players of the world, he can handle. The thing is, if federer doesn't win this time either - big occasion, the one grand slam he has never won before, the grand slam he needs to complete all four in a row - I don't think he'll ever figure the kid out.

In the previous matchups - it was always federer who'd had to win these thing - you had the feeling it was all up to him. This time, I think it's all up to Nadal.


notes from today's semis:

- nalbandian is an idiot. and he pulled a hennin. Hah. and only shortly after he stated in a recent conference that even if he was 5-0 down in one of the most mportant grand slams of the calander - no amout of pain would shoo him off the court. ofcourse, the journos kindly reminded him of his quote :P

- ljubibitch, ahem, opps, i meant ljubicic played his match in the most mean-spirit I have ever seen. Whining to the chair umpire that nadal was taking too long between point and the umpire should tell him off (even though the umpire saw nadal playing within the rules (except that one time violation warning, meh)) - most prolly a tactic to distract the kid. But then ivan goes complaining of converation between toni nadal and rafa! even though the only conversation we saw on tv was both of them muttering 'vamos' to each other in turns (which is always quite funny, really). but the last straw was when he nearly didn't shake hands with the kid! he walked directly to the umpire, shook hands and was about to walk to his bench, with the kid (a little taken aback that he hadn't met him at the net), rushed up to ljubibitch, ahem, sorry again, and forced a semi-shake out of him. That tells you alot about someone.

3 Comments:

Blogger bono-fan said...

to begin with - mera sab say phele objection is when you talk about sampras like that :(. this comment/post shud be about fed and nadal but i cant help but defend sampras. The thing is, among all 4 american men, pete,andre,chang,courier, - pete was the weakest of them all, conditioning wise. He wasnt always the most fittest of all, he wore out, he was compartively short on staimna but BIG on inspirational stuff. Sampras, as long his body supported him, which was `92 till `98. After which his overall career performance declined and obviously, by that time he had his sights fixed on his strengths, instead of trying to coax something out of clay which was never natural to him. He reached 3 QFs ( consecutive years ) and one Semi Final losing to eventual finalist. You have to consider the fact that sampras did try what he could, but he did not shy away from clay. He knew he ll have this stigma on him if he doesnt do well on clay ( which eventually wasnt able to )

Rog - sampras's heir and one who is going to emulate everything pete ever achieved. Come sunday, i ll be praying to God for rog to let him get it, and sidrah , you make an absolute cracker of a point by saying that if rog doesnt win it now, he might not be able to repeat it in coming years. He had the perfect buildup to finals and nadal has been a touch shaky plus he KNOWS fed is most determined now and last time round at rome, nadal JUST got away with it. I ll be looking forward to this match.

3:30 AM  
Blogger S. said...

the sampras-soul speaks :P haha, you never let me talk against sampras!!!!! :D

abid: i'm still very confused qho to root for. all i know is it'll be great if any man won - both have nothing to prove anymore: nadal isn't a one-year wonder and federer can play on any surface.

it's not about 'the best man wins' this time :)

12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wasn't a Grand Slam winning all four titles in one year?

10:24 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home