Didn't watch a lot of the Paris Masters over the weekend, but was stunned to see David Ferrer had finally manged to beat Rafael Nadal. (Or should I call him Rafael Williams? He seems to have adopted the sisters' strategy when it comes to non-Slams.)
Novak Djokovic beat Roger Federer in the semis, then took out defending champion Ferrer, 7-5 7-5, to capture the title and keep alive his hopes of reclaiming the world number one spot by the end of the year. Reuters reports: The Serb recovered from a break down in both sets to snatch his third consecutive title, and the 40th of his career, following victories in Beijing and at the Shanghai Masters last month.
"I knew that coming into the match I was going to have to work for my points," Djokovic told a news conference.
"He was not going to give me too many free points. He was going to run for every ball. He's a great competitor, one of the most respected guys on tour because he works hard and he's very humble and he's a very nice person."
9 comments:
Nadal has won 10 titles this year, 2 of them slams...
Back on top of the computer rankings, not real-life rankings. (Although losing in the first round at Wimbledon doesn't exactly make you the model of consistency, though!)
Mind-blowing stat: Nadal has won only two career titles indoors, and one of those was on clay.
Not real-life rankings? He's won more titles than any man this season, more Masters 1000s and more Slams than any man this season. He's also beaten the former #1 in six of their last eight matches. Tell me how that doesn't correlate to real-life rankings (if you'll actually post this)?
LoveTheGrunt: I don't think you understand what I wrote, but I do think you need some professional help! xo
With the title of the post and your comments, I'm certain I understood you perfectly. If not, why didn't you enlighten me? Perhaps because you can't handle that Nadal overtook your precious Nole as #1, so you resorted to a dig by telling me I need some professional help. Why? For stating facts? How transparent. And my comment was because you didn't post my last reply re: the same post. You're biased and scared of looking like a fool on your own blog. Sad. Now post that!
LoveTheGrunt: Nadal is the REAL number one no matter what. He won two Slams and the most titles. However, my post is about how Nole has a chance to regain the No. 1 ranking on the COMPUTER -- which I think is bullshit (or FAKE) in cases like this.
NOW do you get it?
No, I still don't get it because your post discusses nothing about Djokovic regaining the No. 1 ranking, COMPUTER or otherwise. In addition, you claimed I misunderstood your comment about "real-life rankings" (in the comments section) but have yet to offer an explanation. And you said Nadal's inexplicable loss in the first round of Wimbledon makes him inconsistent when in 16 tournaments played this year, he won 10, made the final of three and the semifinals of two. I'd call that the model of consistency. Which makes your reference to him and the sisters ridiculous (and you know it).
Just read this and save yourself by not posting it.
Lovethegrunt: This was never about the post, although it does jibe with what I am saying. It was about the comment I made to Brent, which could not be any clearer. YOU'RE the only one who doesn't get it.
I am saying in real life, he IS number one. We are agreeing. What is your problem?
Post a Comment