Aww I want David Nalbandian to win :( He is the better player do you agree?

Question

Can i just clarify i dont mean Nalbandian is the better player overall, dont be soooo ridiculous!!! Federer is number 1 for a reason and has achieved sooo much im just saying today i thought David played the better match! Nina your soooo biast anything said about your precious ``roger`` hahaha

Answer 1

I can't agree. They were pretty even in 1st set, David was a bit better, but in last 2, Federer crushed him.

Answer 2

Well he lost, lol

Answer 3

You're the only one who thinks Nalbandian is a better player than Federer (except the uninformed or those who hate winners like Federer).

Amazing, I'm agreeing with Dr. D: Federer has 12 Grand Slam Titles. Nalby: 0.  I like Nalby a lot though, and he has given Federer a ton of trouble. Its weird, like Blake v Nadal, Nadal is overall the better player, but Blake can beat him (except the last time they met).

Answer 4

I was expecting Nalbandian to win, primarily because of hte trouble he has caused Federer inthe past, and the fact that Federer is way off his best form.

But I don't think he is better than Federer. I mean 12 grandslam titles to zero.

Answer 5

no i do not think he is the better player. no sorry...

Answer 6

absolutly not, look at the stats, fed played better.

Answer 7

I whole-heartedly agree! It's really unfortunate that he couldn't beat Federer this time. I guess it's up to Djokovic/Querrey to take him out before the final now.

Answer 8

David did beat Roger several times before because there is something about Nalbanian game that Roger doesn't like. However, if you want to upset the #1 player, you have to be in good shape. David Nalbanian is fat.

Answer 9

Yes, he's the better player but unfortunately he lost. I guess he self destructed today judging by the 2nd and 3rd set scores. Too many double faults too!

What a crappy day...first davy won, now fed. I guess to make it worse Rafa and Nole will loose their matches too.

Answer 10

yes. i agree..i think he just lost his concentration after the first set...

Answer 11

It is clear that Roger Federer is a better player than Nalbandian, even in a season he has been temporarily setback by the energy-sapping viral illness mononucleosis.

Federer just sent out a strong message to the other players and his short-sighted, sensationlist press critics -- ‘watch out, I’m back’.

What a great match and win for Federer. He played beat the tough clay competitor Nalbandian 5-7, 6-2, 6-2 in a high quality match lasting 2 hours 8 mins, winning 56% of the total points (101 of 187 points), with 43 winners and 30 unforced errors. What is even more positive for Federer is that he won without his best serving -- he got only 52% of his first serves in (his first serve percentage actually dropped from 60% in the first set to 46% in the second set and 48% in the third set). He has 4.5 to 5.5.weeks to work on improving his serving and claycourt game further.

Nalbandian entered the match having already played 15 matches on clay this year (winning 14), so he has had a lot of match practice on clay, twice as much as Federer. Nalbandian had crushed Tommy Robredo in the match before, 6-1, 6-0 and momentum was on his side. Nalbandian is a high-quality clay competitor, but I think his best surface is indoor hardcourts.

When Nalbandian beat Federer the last two times they played (in Madrid and Paris), Federer’s press critics jumped on it as signs of his vulnerability, decline, blah, blah, blah. But they conveniently omitted that, while Nalbandian had convincingly beaten Nadal and Djokovic, his matches with Federer were far closer, separated by a few points only. Of the 310 total points played between Nalbandian and Federer in both those indoor Masters events, Nalbandian had won only 4 more points than Federer did (the Madrid match was dead even, while David won 4 more points in the Paris match).  If Federer won just two or three of the right points in each match, he would have won both matches.

One and the half weeks after his loss in the Paris Masters, Federer dominated the field in the Shanghai Tennis Masters Cup in mid-November, playing sublime tennis (see clips). Federer may have been temporarily setback by mononucleosis this year, but a great player does not lose those natural abilities in just five months.

http://tinyurl.com/2rufxt

http://tinyurl.com/4c9jwk

Now it remains to be seen whether Federer, whose fitness was drained by his mono illness, can recover from a two hour plus match today and his eight straight match in 10 days to beat presumably Djokovic tomorrow. But whether Federer wins or loses the Monte Carlo title should not be the primary objective. Federer really needs to get the high-quality match practice in Monte Carlo and use it to help him peak just before the French Open. Federer has to keep his eye on the big prize even at the expense of a lesser title at Monte Carlo.

The bad news for Nadal and Djokovic is that Federer now has 4.5 to 5.5 weeks to finetune his serving and claycourt game, and he has one of the best claycourt coaches in Jose Higueras to advise him. The coaching and learning process with a new coach has  probably resulted in short term inconsistencies in Federer’s game in Estoril and Monte Carlo, but the real improvements through coaching will be seen by Rome or Hamburg and certainly by the French Open.

Answer 12

yup