- 58,319
- 29,800
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
Sucks I'm at work right now.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
That's the thing with tennis or other individual sports, I guess, is that all the lower-ranked players have the ability to make huge shots... hit big forehands, rip crosscourt backhands and hammer down huge serves. They can all win points, games and even a set off of top players. I play tennis and if I played 100 points with Rafa, hypothetically speaking, I think can, at least, win a few points here and there. But can I do it over 5 sets at Wimbledon? Of course not. And I'm just a recreational player.Originally Posted by GUNNA GET IT
Seriously, that has to be the greatest display of tennis from a not top 50 player EVER.
How can someone play this good and not be a top player"?
Im baffled
Rosol tho
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/news/20120628/wimbledon-2012/#ixzz1zBWQcV2uPut it together and Rosol, making his debut at the All England Club, overpowered 11-time Grand Slam champion Nadal 6-7 (9), 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4, one of the most astonishing results in tennis history.
They're both 26 years old, yet Nadal entered the day with 583 career match wins, and Rosol 19. Nadal owns 50 titles, Rosol zero. In 178 prior Grand Slam matches, Nadal never had lost to a foe ranked 70th or worse. In five previous visits to Wimbledon, Rosol lost every time in the first round of qualifying -- not even the main event. Qualifying. This is only the Czech player's second career tour-level event on grass; the first was two weeks ago.
you wouldnt win more than 2 points on RafaOriginally Posted by SinnerP
That's the thing with tennis or other individual sports, I guess, is that all the lower-ranked players have the ability to make huge shots... hit big forehands, rip crosscourt backhands and hammer down huge serves. They can all win points, games and even a set off of top players. I play tennis and if I played 100 points with Rafa, hypothetically speaking, I think can, at least, win a few points here and there. But can I do it over 5 sets at Wimbledon? Of course not. And I'm just a recreational player.Originally Posted by GUNNA GET IT
Seriously, that has to be the greatest display of tennis from a not top 50 player EVER.
How can someone play this good and not be a top player"?
Im baffled
Rosol tho
The same a theory applies to lower-ranked guys. All the pros (and I'm talking out-of-top-100 guys here) have the ability to hit winners and win points off the top guys... they just can't do it consistently in a best-of-5 sets match for 7 straight matches.
With Rosol, I really hope he can continue with his strong-form in the next couple of rounds. Clearly he has the shots to be a top 50 or even top 20 player... the issue remains... does he have the consistency?
Originally Posted by Proshares
I haven't really been watching with an ear to the commentators or the post match analysis but from what I've heard, a good amount of folks are using that 30 minute delay as a reason he came out a little flat to start the 5th. They're not using it as an excuse but just tossing it out there to see if it sticks.
GUNNA GET IT wrote:
you wouldnt win more than 2 points on Rafa
but my point is how can this guy play this good for 5 sets vs Rafa arguably the greatest player in the game
Rafa was not playing poorly neither. rosol took it to his #+* . Like the SI article says, Rafa damn near got straight setted. Im actually glad it went 5 sets b/c that showed it wasnt some Lucky shots. he overcame his own adversity and turned it back up
I'd be happy if I won 2 out of 100 points against Rafa.
But my point is, all pros have the physical ability to hit big winners against anyone. Most just aren't able to string it together consistently.
I haven't read the SI article, but I felt Rafa played pretty poorly in the first 3 sets. Hit shots were either landing way-short or were several feet out... something you rarely see from him. Actually, he had no business winning the 1st set tie-break. Rosol just got a bit tight and netted on set-point. But all match, Rosol was just everything with tons of pace (90mph groundstrokes!)... Rafa barely had any time to react! Rafa also had NO answers for Rosol's serve. Like dawgz said, Rafa was slicing a lot of his backhands back... probably cuz he could get a good-feel on his top-spin strokes. Looked very uncomfortable.
In the 4th, Rafa sorta found his form while Rosol got a bit tight. He started missing a few shots and serves.
Did the delay hurt him? Perhaps. Rafa had a bit of momentum, easily winning the 4th with 2 breaks. I think he would have won had there not been a delay. But at the same time, given the situation of the delay, you'd still pick Rafa to win. Not saying it's an excuse for him losing cuz Rosol came out playing very aggressive and got the early break. I think Rosol won his final 2 service games to love... reflecting how well he was serving.Originally Posted by Proshares
I haven't really been watching with an ear to the commentators or the post match analysis but from what I've heard, a good amount of folks are using that 30 minute delay as a reason he came out a little flat to start the 5th. They're not using it as an excuse but just tossing it out there to see if it sticks.