Fed's seeding: amazing

[Scott]

He's 31 going on 32, and he's seeded #2 at the FO. Granted, he
deserves at most a #3 seed. However, how amazing is it at his age
he's seeded that high in a slam?

[Ulysses]

Let's see if he can take advantage of a "good" draw and make the
final. It would be an incredible achievement for him to win a second
FO. He can't do it unless someone takes out Nadal. And I think the
only person who even has a miniscule chance is Nole.

[Scott]

not to mention that Rafa would seem to be easier to beat in a SF than
a final.

[Ulysses]

Assuming Djoker even makes the semi. His form since MC has been dismal.

[Court_1]

At the FO? I don't believe that.

[Scott]

how many FO finals has Nadal lost?

[Court_1]

How many FO SF has Nadal lost?

[Scott]

was Nadal's loss to Soderling closer to being a SF or a F?

[Court_1]

That is irrelevant. There is no evidence to suggest he is more likely
to lose in a SF than a F at the FO. He has only lost in the fourth
round ONCE since 2005. The only thing that would suggest that his SF
may be tougher now is the fact that Djokovic is a tougher match-up for
him. He is the only guy who may be able to beat Nadal at the FO but
until he does it, Nadal is just as likely to win a SF as he would a F
at this particular event.

[Whisper]

When you consider the paucity of talent outside top 3 it's not
surprising at all. Who else is good enough to rank higher?

[reilloc]

Well, when Sampras was 31...

I guess I don't need to finish that sentence but, here, let me help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_ATP_Tour#ATP_entry_rankings

LNC

[Scott]

I wrote: "not to mention that Rafa would seem to be easier to beat in
a SF than
a final." Courtie finds the phrase "seem to be easier to beat in a
SF" so objectionable that she believes three hysterical posts are
needed to convey "There is no evidence" for this view.

Courtie sure seems to get upset when she knows that other people don't
share her opinion about something.

[Dave Hazelwood]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 15:01:13 -0700 (PDT), Ulysses <uly...@mscomm.com>
wrote:

I would rate Nole's chances of taking out Rafa as EXCELLENT !

[Dave Hazelwood]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 15:10:39 -0700 (PDT), Ulysses <uly...@mscomm.com>
wrote:

I would rate Fed chances of taking out Nole in a final as pretty good.

[Dave Hazelwood]

what are his chances of losing in R2 at Wimbledon?

[Dave Hazelwood]

Rosel ? He made the fool of Rafa at the world championships no?

[Court_1]

I don't care whether you share my opinion or not. I am stating a fact
that there is no evidence to support your claim that it is easier to
beat Nadal in a SF at the FO than it is in a final since the only time
Nadal actually lost at the FO was in the fourth round. Surely even you
as much as you clearly hate Nadal can see that unless you are a total
moron.

If Nadal has only lost once in a fourth round how is it possible to
claim that he is more likely to lose in a SF rather than a final? The
only thing you can claim from the evidence is he has lost once in the
fourth round. Logic not your strong suit I guess? Go back to your
theories about Martians and 9/11 fantasies or whatever.

[Court_1]

On May 24, 11:11 pm, Dave Hazelwood <fedna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 16:54:41 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Better than his chances of losing in the SF at the FO. :)

[Dave Hazelwood]

ask sodeling.

[Court_1]

On May 24, 11:36 pm, Dave Hazelwood <fedna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 20:17:24 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I would except for the fact that Soderling did not beat Nadal in the
SF dummy. It was the fourth round.

[Dave Hazelwood]

dun matter. all rounds b4 the final are easier.