Forum Klix.ba

primus-1 wrote:

Art-Vandaley wrote:crni rafa sta dopusti da ovaj levat ima sansu da osvoji rg...

reci da se salis,haj budi drug...

Ma pusti njega, pa vidi sta piskara

Svaka cast Federeru, ogroman je pritisak istrpio i pokazao da je najveci. Dovoljno je reci 20-to uzastopno polufinale na GS turnirima.

primus-1 wrote:

Art-Vandaley wrote:crni rafa sta dopusti da ovaj levat ima sansu da osvoji rg...

reci da se salis,haj budi drug...

sto bi se salio zna se da federer nema ni promil sanse protiv nadala na sljaci...

Art-Vandaley wrote:

primus-1 wrote:

Art-Vandaley wrote:crni rafa sta dopusti da ovaj levat ima sansu da osvoji rg...

reci da se salis,haj budi drug...

sto bi se salio zna se da federer nema ni promil sanse protiv nadala na sljaci...

Pa kako ga je onda dobio u finalu Madrida na šljaci u dva seta, prije 3 sedmice ?

KIA wrote:p.s. ako ova Safina sad ne osvoji GS , treba odmah da se obesi

a nekako osecam da ce pobediti samu sebe , pa makar igrala i protiv Stosurove ...

Citiram samu sebe , tachno sam znala sta ce biti , psihicki je jos gora od njenog brata ... Jadna devojka , mogu da zamislim psihicki out u kom ce biti nakon ovoga ...

A Kuznetsova ladno uze jos jedan GS

dobar clanak o duplim standardima

Invincible Rafa: Losing only counts if you're Roger

When Roger Federer, winner of five straight Wimbledon titles, lost to Rafael Nadal on center court last year, it took about two minutes for the world to have him dead and buried. No matter that Federer was still recuperating from mononucleosis and had no energy. The number-one seed was finished, washed up, annihilated; Federer was history.

Funny how what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

Evidently, Sunday, May 31 should mean less than nothing to Rafael Nadal. His defeat in the fourth round of the French Open is a bit of spilt milk, nothing more. The Guardian summed up reaction to the loss in a June 1 headline: "Spain puts Nadal loss down to bad day at the office."

When Federer won only four games against Nadal in last year's French Open, ESPN branded it a "humiliation." As a matter of fact, the sporting news giant claims that in the last 15 months, Federer has been a "marked man."

No matter that the loss to Nadal was Federer's third consecutive appearance in the finals at Roland Garros. No matter that just months later Federer became the only man in tennis history to have five consecutive wins at both Wimbledon and the US Open. (Did I mention he reached the fourth round without dropping a set?)

ESPN isn't the only media outlet to brand Federer a has-been. In August of last year, the UK's Telegraph claimed that loss of the number-one ranking had marked Federer's "psychological [and] emotional end," even if he regained it. If popular opinion and sports writers are to be believed, losing on one's favored surface, in a tournament one has dominated for years, immediately emits the stench of death.

If one is Roger Federer, that is.

Nadal's Madrid Open loss didn't even warrant a chorus of que sera, sera. His loss in straight sets to Federer was hardly a blip on the radar, much less a signal to the buzzards to start circling. I'm confused. The tournament was in Nadal's home country, on clay courts, and the loss was to his bitter rival. One would think the death knell would be heard around the world, but were you even aware of it? I'd bet money you weren't.

And what of Nadal's latest escapade? I didn't realize a fourth round loss in any grand slam tournament was negligible, never mind when it's a loss to 23rd seed Robin Soderling in a tournament the Spaniard has won four consecutive years. Far from being the first nail in Nadal's coffin, this year's French Open loss has signaled nothing more than an early vacation for the number-one seed.

Nadal's loss was chalked up to "windy conditions" (lawntennis.org), "an off day" (Reuters), his "collared shirts" (CNBC), "a tough weekend" (National Post). And if these excuses weren't enough, the New York Magazine loves Nadal so much that the writers are willing to take his loss on their own shoulders.

"Did We Jinx Rafa?" reads their June 1 headline. The magazine believes its 2008 Nadal lovefest led directly to his 2009 problems. Since claiming Nadal was the "future" of tennis while Federer was the past, the Spaniard seems to be in a bit of trouble.

But that's okay. In last Monday's article, New York Magazine printed only what everyone else is trying to verbalize. "We're not counting the 22-year-old Nadal out— that would be ludicrous."

After all, they print, "He did crush Federer so badly at the Australian Open that he made the man cry." At least Nadal didn't cry after he lost to Soderling. Not that we could see, anyway. Nadal was on a plane back to Mallorca faster than Andy Roddick's serve.

So, if anything, Nadal's French Open loss is just a tribute to his being human after all. How wonderful to realize he's not perfect! That makes him so much more loveable, doesn't it? And clearly a much better tennis player, too. A loss like can only make a champion indomitable, right?

Roger Federer excluded, of course.

dobar clanak o duplim standardima

Invincible Rafa: Losing only counts if you're Roger

When Roger Federer, winner of five straight Wimbledon titles, lost to Rafael Nadal on center court last year, it took about two minutes for the world to have him dead and buried. No matter that Federer was still recuperating from mononucleosis and had no energy. The number-one seed was finished, washed up, annihilated; Federer was history.

Funny how what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

Evidently, Sunday, May 31 should mean less than nothing to Rafael Nadal. His defeat in the fourth round of the French Open is a bit of spilt milk, nothing more. The Guardian summed up reaction to the loss in a June 1 headline: "Spain puts Nadal loss down to bad day at the office."

When Federer won only four games against Nadal in last year's French Open, ESPN branded it a "humiliation." As a matter of fact, the sporting news giant claims that in the last 15 months, Federer has been a "marked man."

No matter that the loss to Nadal was Federer's third consecutive appearance in the finals at Roland Garros. No matter that just months later Federer became the only man in tennis history to have five consecutive wins at both Wimbledon and the US Open. (Did I mention he reached the fourth round without dropping a set?)

ESPN isn't the only media outlet to brand Federer a has-been. In August of last year, the UK's Telegraph claimed that loss of the number-one ranking had marked Federer's "psychological [and] emotional end," even if he regained it. If popular opinion and sports writers are to be believed, losing on one's favored surface, in a tournament one has dominated for years, immediately emits the stench of death.

If one is Roger Federer, that is.

Nadal's Madrid Open loss didn't even warrant a chorus of que sera, sera. His loss in straight sets to Federer was hardly a blip on the radar, much less a signal to the buzzards to start circling. I'm confused. The tournament was in Nadal's home country, on clay courts, and the loss was to his bitter rival. One would think the death knell would be heard around the world, but were you even aware of it? I'd bet money you weren't.

And what of Nadal's latest escapade? I didn't realize a fourth round loss in any grand slam tournament was negligible, never mind when it's a loss to 23rd seed Robin Soderling in a tournament the Spaniard has won four consecutive years. Far from being the first nail in Nadal's coffin, this year's French Open loss has signaled nothing more than an early vacation for the number-one seed.

Nadal's loss was chalked up to "windy conditions" (lawntennis.org), "an off day" (Reuters), his "collared shirts" (CNBC), "a tough weekend" (National Post). And if these excuses weren't enough, the New York Magazine loves Nadal so much that the writers are willing to take his loss on their own shoulders.

"Did We Jinx Rafa?" reads their June 1 headline. The magazine believes its 2008 Nadal lovefest led directly to his 2009 problems. Since claiming Nadal was the "future" of tennis while Federer was the past, the Spaniard seems to be in a bit of trouble.

But that's okay. In last Monday's article, New York Magazine printed only what everyone else is trying to verbalize. "We're not counting the 22-year-old Nadal out— that would be ludicrous."

After all, they print, "He did crush Federer so badly at the Australian Open that he made the man cry." At least Nadal didn't cry after he lost to Soderling. Not that we could see, anyway. Nadal was on a plane back to Mallorca faster than Andy Roddick's serve.

So, if anything, Nadal's French Open loss is just a tribute to his being human after all. How wonderful to realize he's not perfect! That makes him so much more loveable, doesn't it? And clearly a much better tennis player, too. A loss like can only make a champion indomitable, right?

Roger Federer excluded, of course.

[quote="sa2101"]dobar clanak o duplim standardima

Invincible Rafa: Losing only counts if you're Roger

Ovaj Clanak je Federer platio

moguce al' ne mozes reci da nema tacnih stvari.

sa2101 wrote:moguce al' ne mozes reci da nema tacnih stvari.

Pa , ima , ali sta sad .. Kad rokne zemljotres u Japanu , to nije breaking news , kad se to dogodi negde drugde , svi o tome trube ...

Da je Rafa 4 godine drao sve redom i drzao No.1 poziciju , ista bi reakcija novinara bila ... Nista cudno , senzacionalisticko novinarstvo prodaje novine ...

Ovo je prva reakcija koja mu se omakla , uz cmizdrenje na AO

blizu je wimbledon opet ce fedja da place...

KIA wrote:

sa2101 wrote:moguce al' ne mozes reci da nema tacnih stvari.

Pa , ima , ali sta sad .. Kad rokne zemljotres u Japanu , to nije breaking news , kad se to dogodi negde drugde , svi o tome trube ...

Da je Rafa 4 godine drao sve redom i drzao No.1 poziciju , ista bi reakcija novinara bila ... Nista cudno , senzacionalisticko novinarstvo prodaje novine ...

ovaj poraz nadala ja mislim jos vise stavlja u perspektivu koliko je nevjerovatno to sto je roger uradio. biti broj jedan 4 godine, boriti se sa uzasnim pritiskom, nositi breme favorita, i nekako uspjeti ostati zdrav je nevjerovatno dostignuce. nadal nije izdrzao ni punu godinu. da se zna, nemam nista protiv nadal, mislim da je sjajan igrac i izgleda kao jako fina i skromna osoba, ali federer je apsolutni genije, i po meni nema sumnje ko je najbolji igrac svih vremena.

sa2101 wrote: ovaj poraz nadala ja mislim jos vise stavlja u perspektivu koliko je nevjerovatno to sto je roger uradio. biti broj jedan 4 godine, boriti se sa uzasnim pritiskom, nositi breme favorita, i nekako uspjeti ostati zdrav je nevjerovatno dostignuce. nadal nije izdrzao ni punu godinu. da se zna, nemam nista protiv nadal, mislim da je sjajan igrac i izgleda kao jako fina i skromna osoba, ali federer je apsolutni genije, i po meni nema sumnje ko je najbolji igrac svih vremena.

Jel si upoznat da je Rafa otkazao Queens , a moguce cak i Wimbledon jer vuce povredu jos od polufinala Madrida ? Da li mislis da bi Federer imao ikakve sanse u finalu RG da je Rafa " ziv i zdrav " ?

To ne baca senku na Federerovu sutrasnju pobedu u finalu i na cinjenicu da je on najbolji , ali budimo realniji malo realniji , pa pokazimo pravo stanje stvari ...

pa to upravo i kazem. da je cudo sto je federer toliko godina igrao na najvisem nivou a da je uspio ostati zdrav, svjez (sto je vjestina sama za sebe), a i kada je bio bolestan (mononukleoza s kojom se ancic bori vec dvije godine) dospio je do polufinala jednog grand slama. nadalu vec tijelo pocinje da otkazuje. roger je dospio u 20 grand slam finala zaredom. prosli rekord je bio 10. upravo ta dosljednost je nevjerovatna.

http://www.mtsmondo.com/sport/vesti/tex ... est=137026

ma bolji je federer od nadala, to se najbolje vidi po omjeru pobjeda i poraza

Kako ce mu "Sved" danas uzet RG.
Pravi Turnir pocinje uskoro.


Come on Ana!
Come on Andy!

hidrant wrote:Kako ce mu "Sved" danas uzet RG.
Pravi Turnir pocinje uskoro.


Come on Ana!
Come on Andy!

Ti mora da imas nesto karakterno s tim bezveznim likom iz Svedske, kad predvidjas nemoguce?
Jos dva gema...

Gledali smo stvaranje istorije tenisa



tuto kompleto

Kakve se ovo neistine iznose?
Kako je ovaj najbolji svih vremena?

Ako je Wimbledon najjaci turnir na svijetu,logicno je da je najbolji igrac svih vremena onaj ko je osvojio
najbise puta ovaj Turnir.

Sve cestitke neponovljivom Carobnjaku iz Basela. Sada ce tek puno lakse biti doci do petnaeste, sesnaeste pa i sedamnaeste titule s GS a misicavi Matador iz spanskoga sela Manacor, neka ide u teretanu. Tamo 'stanuju' misicavi!

List of career achievements by Roger Federer AKA Records held by Roger Federer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_he ... er_Federer


Veliki Pete Sampras je jedva jednom dogurao dalje od cetvrtfinala Roland Garosa (polufinale 1996), a Federer je igrao cetiri finala zaredom i zadnje dobio...

@hidrant idi zasmijavaj ljude na drugim temema

zimzelen wrote:Sve cestitke neponovljivom Carobnjaku iz Basela. Sada ce tek puno lakse biti doci do petnaeste, sesnaeste pa i sedamnaeste titule s GS a misicavi Matador iz spanskoga sela Manacor, neka ide u teretanu. Tamo 'stanuju' misicavi!

E bio je red da Federer pobijedi zaslužio je