Facebook managed to do it with the Wispa!
I want to do it with the old recipe Quaker Oat Krunchies.
Yes – there’s Oat Crisp – I know, believe me, I know!
A couple of years ago PepsiCo (who own Quaker) took Oat Krunchies away and replaced them with Oat Crisp (in a nicer-looking packet). Now, to explain: Oat Crisps appear to be virtual carbon copies of Oat Krunchies, except for – as far as I can tell – a significant reduction in the receipe’s salt content.
But if that’s all that has changed, damnnit, that salt made all the difference! It may also be that there’s some malt missing, or they’ve used a different malt. Who knows?
But the flavour now is a disappointment. The flavour of old was simply delicious. There was nothing to compare.
Why is it “they” always find out which are life’s truely mass-market culinary delights, and either take them away or just change the receipes? “They” did it with Wispa, but bless them they brought that beauty back. And I have thanked Cadbury many times over with my wallet.
PepsiCo listen up! I hereby pledge that if you make ‘em, I will buy ‘em in great quantities:
Nadal does seem to be one of the genuinely nicest high profile players on the tour. And now he is injured and cannot defend his Wimbledon title nor the number one spot. As such, I feel slightly mean writing this – a bit, not too much. He’s done quite well for himself, he has a strong healthy family who love him and care for him, excellent tennis skills, and competitive spirit, hoards of adoring fans, loads of cash, loads of respect, and six Majors in his trophy collection. There’s no need to feel too sorry after all.
And I’m not trying to bring his person down.
My motivation to attack his tennis is quite simple – I find it boring. His defensive style, the grunting, the waiting. His team’s long and carefully-honed tactics executed perfectly and robotically by their machine. The long long points mostly consisting of baseline rallies. Very little separating him from his rivals in matches other than the number of unforced errors. He wins by increments, and simply wears down his opponent psychologically and physically. Maybe I have a short attention span (cricket bores me to tears). But let me put it a different way.
Muhammud Ali.
Ali boxed in a way that was so fine, so true to the spirit of the sport that it inspired and transcended the sport. Federer has the same thing in his blood. Nadal does not. And as time goes on, articles written about Nadal have highlighted that he may even care less for tennis than he does for soccer.
Before Roland Garros, people loved a winner. Media loves a winner, fans love a winner. He is a noble, mature young man who also appears to be kind and support worthy causes. Ali’s greatest rival, Jo Frazier, was also kind it seems – he helped a bummed out Ali, and Ali repaid him with unkindness. Yet Ali is far more popular and is considered the greater fighter. Ali despised the way Frazier fought, yet saw him as perhaps his greatest threat. No doubt whatsoever that people would watch Ali’s over Frazier’s fights. Boxers aspire to the finer skills presented by Ali, but obviously, more fighters can consistently achieve the coarser skills and qualities possessed by Frazier. Similarly Nadal – his skills are already being emulated successfully by some on the tour.
Some would argue that Ali’s superior natural gifts also meant he did not have the heart of a champion, as they say much the same thing about Federer, especially when he gives matches away. Having an abundance of natural talent, though, does not necessarily exclude having a champion’s heart, it just means that obviously it is underdeveloped, and will have to grow with age as the talent wears off – if the desire remains. Nadal’s heart was never in question, and to this point it has saved his ass countless times while facing superior play. In fact, in recent months it has been all that he could do to stay in some matches, and that is via his heart alone.
To many tennis fans the 2008 Wimbledon Final was a really emotional day. To me, a very sad day, but this had nothing to do with who was involved. It’s quite possible many people watching didn’t like Federer more as a human being. But we don’t watch sport because one guy supports a certain charity we like, and the other doesn’t. That’s another discussion. Generally, sport is sport. The sadness stems more from the Wimbledon final being, as one writer put it “the funeral of a wonderful, attacking, creative, beautiful game” – or something like that. Tennis, in other words.
The 2008 Wimbledon Final seems akin to Frazier beating Ali in the “Fight of the Century” – their first bout. Frazier wasn’t a sight to behold, not a stylish boxer, just very solid, very strong, and very consistent. He inexorably ploughed forward and got in his opponent’s face, he fought very predictably. Against arguably the greatest fighter in history (who wasn’t quite fight fit) it was enough. Joe Frazier won it, he won the most celebrated fight in history. Nadal won perhaps the most celebrated tennis final in history.
Sure, boxing is different from tennis – for a start, boxers only face their rivals twice or maybe three times at most. Frazier was a great boxer, certainly close and perhaps equal to Ali on the occasions they met, but he will never be considered the greatest. He lost too badly against other fighters (e.g. Foreman) and Ali was able to beat them. Much like Federer has a winning record against almost the entire field apart from Nadal.
At only 23 (!) there are a growing number of players who can beat Nadal. And with or without the threat of injury hanging over him, which let’s face it is nothing new (he has had knee troubles from the start), it’s only a matter of time before the numerous really close matches start not going his way. A few knocks to Nadal’s confidence and spirit, as with the great boxers of their time, will be the final straws to allow some of his closest competitors to start beating him regularly. Murray, Federer (yes, still), Djokovic, Del Potro (a future number one – mark my words), Tsonga… all of them have better games. Maybe even Verdasco… ok maybe not, he’s a little too much like Nadal’s whipping boy.
So, is it better to be able to beat everyone in the field apart from one player? Or is it better to be able to beat the player nobody else can beat?
Something along the lines of his knee injury being too painful to play at 100% on. Apparently he ran like a maniac in today’s match against Wawrinka, but it wasn’t enough to win, nor restore his confidence he would be ok.
Sensible move after this last year of tormenting the helpless poor knee, surely.
But Nadal has effectively just handed the number one spot to Federer, and that has got to hurt. One thing’s for sure, as their careers have developed, Federer and Nadal have spurred each other to greater heights than they might otherwise have done. So Nadal resting, for a later comeback may yet produce more delicious moments in their great rivalry.
In fact I would bet Nadal will be a mental force to be reckoned with come the US Open time, and I’d hazard a guess that what clinched withdrawing from Wimbledon for him was that he decided he really wants to complete the Slam and get the US Open. Then at least he can consider himself a “complete” player before his knees finally cave in.
I’ve underestimated Federer too much over the past year, a lot of people have (not the other players though!). With perhaps his most coveted prize captured, does he feel complete now? Sure he does. Possibly that’s partly why he took a week off afterwards – to think about his motivations.
Does he now go into freefall as some argue? I say, no. My back up is only this: the first half of the French Open final, which I’ve just watched, and the highlights of his match against Nadal in Madrid.
Firstly, Federer’s tennis in the Roland Garros final’s first set was so superb that I can’t imagine him not making a resurgence, being inspired by his play on the day (let alone the historic result). His serve is once again phenomenal. With that weapon working it seems clear how much better he still is than the competition. Finally it seems he’s emerged from the after-effects of mono, back injury and some major emotional let downs (inflicted by Nadal) in the last couple of years. Maybe it just couldn’t be forced.
What I wanted to say was the FO final reminded me Federer’s serve has always been the cornerstone of his game, tactically and for confidence – just take a look back at his sole professional match against Sampras.
“A hugely versatile artist” / “Part Radiohead, part Alex Lloyd and part Queen” / “…One very good album…” – GET IT HERE!
In Wimbledon 2001, Federer unequivocally out-served Sampras even while Sampras himself was serving incredibly well.
Yet Federer also had Sampras constantly in trouble on his serve, and I think that’s an aspect of Federer’s game that’s perhaps the most underrated – I mean, his return has got to be the best in the men’s game, hasn’t it? I dare say he is the best returner ever. He sure seems to get a lot more serves back than even Agassi did. More than Nadal, too, and he doesn’t stand so far back. Today, there’s no shortage of big servers (Roddick, Karlovic, Del Potro et al) plus, racquet technology has improved since Agassi’s era, so the serves are consistently harder and faster too. Despite this Fed uses a smaller sized racquet head than most… and he gets back more than Nadal, who uses a bigger head. Blimey. He’s got to be good.
With those two weapons, serve and return, why can’t he take it back to Nadal?
Step one has been achieved – breaking the winning spell Nadal had over him. Doing it on clay was sweeter still. Second step: refuse to be taken in by Nadal’s media smoke signals, on-court rituals and gamesmanship. Those things really got into his head over time. At Madrid he said “enough”. He asked to receive, he waited to take the court after Nadal. He refused to get taken into long rallies – he put extra mustard on every key shot to make sure he took each opportunity instead of resting on his laurels in the belief that his greatness would prevail. Now, realisation comes that the longer the rally, the greater the chance offered to Nadal – who few would argue is the most consistent ball hitter on the planet. To me that means that he’s made a huge step and now acknowledges Nadal’s superior consistency from the baseline. It’s crucial because it now allows him to make the next logical step towards beating Nadal regularly…
Forget the baseline! There are, after all, other parts to a tennis court. Somewhere along the way Federer’s ego got involved and at the wrong times he thought he could overpower a stronger man. All that did was serve up chances, and tire him out emotionally. In Madrid he mixed up the game with beautiful variety, and included elements he previously refused to use (perhaps out of pride about the purity of his game). The drop shot was timed and executed to perfection in Madrid and in the FO final. Purity of his game my ass – I don’t think I’ve ever seen better drop shots. A worthy addition to his game.
So, freed from some of the constraints he seems to have imposed on himself over the years, and witnessing with his own stubborn eyes the slight shift of power as a result of these changes, has him feeling positive – even fatalistically calling himself the Wimbledon favourite. Well, why not as Murray seems intent to play underdog anyway. What seems clear is that if he takes the approach that he is not “above” Nadal in any regard, he prevents himself from being psychologically bullied by Nadal. It is ironic. To make that step in Madrid he had to decide to consider Nadal an equal and therefore fight tooth and nail from the word go, from even before the match started, because all these tools have been used against him, and worked. Now, facing a confident young Butthead (figure it out), Federer also needs to sort out some other housekeeping.
I’m going to go out on a limb here. I think Nadal (who turns just 23 on Wednesday) has peaked. Why, why why do open my big mouth?
Why say this now and risk being proven wrong next weekend? Why expose myself to the vitriol and humiliation that’s coming to me from Nadalites?
Well, for one, I think I’m right. Two, it’s nice to know, occasionally, that you spotted something nobody else did. Three – I’m not cautious like… Nadal. Four – fu^k it, it’s only an opinion. Being wrong, so what. Having my motives questioned for having a go at Nadal? – I can handle that. Five – attention seeker? Yep, probably. Six – I just have a gut instinct about it and you’ve got to follow that.
“A hugely versatile artist” / “Part Radiohead, part Alex Lloyd and part Queen” / “…One very good album…” – GET IT HERE!
So this is the current situation – Nadal at this moment in time is the “overwhelming favourite” worldwide to win Roland Garros. Well, Federer going into his sixth Wimbledon was in the same position. He still believed it was his. Does Nadal believe Roland Garros is his? He isn’t big-talking, but that doesn’t really matter as he has a totally different approach to Federer – he likes being the “underdog” and that is his way. So, yes – he probably does believe it’s his as much as he ever will, i.e. “as long as he plays his best tennis”. Well, we’ll see.
I look at the list of people who have beaten or come close to beating Nadal recently, and it’s interesting. Firstly, usually when a guy is number one in the world, the number of folks beating him shrinks. I just get the feeling (haven’t checked stats on this) that things have become harder for Nadal since he became number one.
And most of the guys who have beaten him in recent times are still around in the French Open and doing pretty darn well on the clay. This indicates that they are rather like Nadal – not too bothered whether they’re on clay, hard court or grass court. So each man is effectively an all-court player who is almost ready, or primed now, to emerge from his cocoon. And that’s quite a few guys knocking on the door. Federer is a given – a wild card. Murray is getting to grips slowly (and don’t forget he almost took a set off Nadal on clay in Monte Carlo). Djokovic is one less thorn in Nadal’s side this time, but there is still Del Potro or Tsonga. For my money even though Tsonga, revitalised after injury, apparently looks pretty lethal right now, I think Del Potro will edge that one. He’s in good form and mentally perhaps the more focussed, more stubborn, and a very hard hitter. Tsonga is so talented, but a little mentally inconsistent. There’s Monfils, too. Possibly Verdasco. I don’t think either the renewed Roddick or Davydenko present any trouble to Nadal on clay, but most of the other guys have further levels to take their game to.
Nadal has not so much more that he can give, in my opinion. This year he’s already drawn on his vast mental stamina too much for it to be easy. He has reached his physical limits too – take Madrid for example. He may look and play like a robot, but he is human, and therefore the increased strain that his style places on him will age him physically and mentally faster than anyone else. I think it’s already happening.
Plus – look to 2010 – in that year he will have so many points to defend that he will lose his ranking to someone like Del Potro who doesn’t have so many to defend. I predict that all Nadal’s close rivals (and they are close) will gradually win more and more matches against him and I think it’s already started.
I think a lot of Federer fans have seen yesterday for what it was – a good step that Fed’s made! Maybe that finger raised in the air didn’t mean “I will be number one” or “I’ve beaten him one more time”, but instead, “Step 1 achieved: break the spell”.
To steal a famous analogy I think he’s displayed the “green shoots of recovery” by his attitude and approach (and result). Though it’s clearly been a bit up and down lately, and the Madrid surface was an anomaly, he’s possibly already been on the slow path to recovery for a few months now. It seems yesterday was evidence that he’s taking a more sensible step-by-step approach towards his goals. And what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.
“A hugely versatile artist” / “Part Radiohead, part Alex Lloyd and part Queen” / “…One very good album…” – GET IT HERE!
Fed’s still capable of great things, I think most people feel that, but like me doubted his ability to rebound emotionally, so yesterday certainly gave fans a small reason for renewed hope. But with the levels at which the top guys are now playing on all surfaces (it hardly makes any difference which one these days) Federer winning any Slam (including the French) is not a given any more.
I do think Federer’s game has a distinct advantage over both Nadal’s and Murray’s. He’s more economical and less prone to injury. He seems to feel this, and appears to be in it for the long run. When he is fully fit and confident, his more efficient style may only just compensate for his advancing age (we will see). But if you level the fitness playing field you get the real tennis matchup emerging and I would pick Federer’s game over either of theirs.
The other element in all this is Djokovic. He is just a tiny bit less mentally tough than Nadal and just a bit less able than Federer. There was so very little separating Djokovic and Nadal in their semis, and I truly thought Djokovic in fairness should have won. I don’t even like the guy but I found new respect for his attitude and the way he fought.
So, Nadal has just a tiny bit more to worry about. This year he has been given a very hard time first by Murray, then Del Potro, then Djokovic. Now that pesky Federer. Despite all this, with Nadal’s penchant for beating the odds it will no doubt only serve to motivate him to greater heights at Roland Garros.
There is a little voice at the back of the class asking a couple of questions: Sir, if Nadal’s so good – what about Del Potro – not exactly a vintage giant-killer – humbling Nadal recently? Or Murray humbling Nadal back in spring sometime? Or – as I write, Verdasco humbling Nadal in a large portion of the second set of today’s Madrid Open quarter final. Yes, all players have bad days, injuries, and OK, as is the routine with Nadal – a caveat underlines each of his losses – “I played really badly”/injured, etc.
I think I agree with the writer that Nadal’s single biggest advantage over Federer is his left-handedness. That’s therefore the case against almost all the players on tour. Like the article says, that massive, highly spun forehand high into any righty’s backhand region is a killer.
So the cherry on top of this advantage against Federer is his successful step into the mind of Federer.
Against Verdasco, a left-hander, Nadal struggles. I would be surprised if he could put his finger on what he did to beat Verdasco on any given day. My feeling is that he just stays his course, stays focussed, and lets Verdasco self-implode. Just like he did against Nalbandian – who had Nadal in dire straits until he performed a black-hole routine.
Against Verdsasco, Nadal loses the natural advantage and the playing field is quite clearly levelled. In the bits I saw today, Verdasco smacked Nadal around the court en-route to a 4-0 lead in the second set, and almost pulled off a second come back later on in the set despite the pressure (that time). In the second set, Verdasco was controlling almost all the points – win or lose. Unfortunately for him, from 4-0 on he lost a ridiculous amount of them!
“A hugely versatile artist” / “Part Radiohead, part Alex Lloyd and part Queen” / “…One very good album…” – GET IT HERE!
I would say Verdasco is almost as skilled a tennis player as Nadal from all quarters, good shot selection, game plan, and slightly more aggressive. And interestingly considering the grunt that goes into Nadal’s shots, Verdasco’s average ground stroke speed is actually faster than Nadal’s (mind you Nadal’s spin counts for a lot). In their match Verdasco hit more winners than Nadal, making pretty shots, playing more stylishly than Nadal. (Nadal, as always, appears totally unimpressed.)
The difference between Verdasco and Nadal – confidence. Nadal’s history. The legend, the “Clay King” aura. Consequently, at 4-0 up in the second set, Verdasco folded and overcooked absolutely everything, his serve, groundstrokes, walking, breathing. Nadal did not have to do a thing but one thing he also did not do was do too much. So, while there was no apparent pressure coming from Nadal, it was almost as if Verdasco’s own conceit made him give it away because of this! While Nadal was hitting easy balls out it looked just like Verdasco’s mind was screaming “this cannot go on, I have to play even better otherwise he will suddenly fight back”. Yep – he will certainly try – but you don’t have to hand him your serve and then some! At 4-0 up Verdasco suddenly freaked and handed the next three games to Nadal. Of course, Nadal, being Nadal, only needed a sniff, and after the gift of three games he took it from there. But just to help Nadal along, Verdasco continued to overcook everything – good job.
The Eurosport commentary team say Nadal’s performance “underlines in huge thick lines precisely why Nadal is essentially unbeatable on this service [sic]“. Nope. what it underlined was “how to beat Nadal on this surface”. Be left-handed, but also – keep your cool, for God’s sakes. It’s a ridiculous assertion to say Nadal won that match. Had Verdasco’s mind not completely deserted him at 4-0 up, he would’ve thrashed Nadal in that second set. Coulda shoulda woulda.
As I continue to be unimpressed by many of Nadal’s wins [tennis-wise] – I just think that much as many tennis fans would like to say that the true greatest may actually now have arrived – no, really this time – the wishful thinking from Nadal’s fans is a bit premature, and the general regard given to Nadal’s game needs a little more balance. There is too little between him and the rest of the field.
[Footnote: and by the way, Del Potro is also currently showing why there is now so little difference between the world's top four players and the rest, as he displays the benefits of being aggressive against supposedly the most in-form player this year - Murray]
Nadal Wins
Nadal-Murray
First set: 6-2
Second set: 7-6 Nadal (4)
First set: Nadal broke Murray three times Murray broke Nadal once.
Second set: One break each (I think).
Murray is pressuring and pushing Nadal to make him over hit a little bit. It’s working. But Nadal breaks a second time courtesy of a few mis hits from Murray, in the wind. Now Nadal is up 4-1 as Murray seems to be looking at his right hand which apparently had a blister yesterday. The feeling is that against Nadal he won’t stand a chance with a blister, and his heart doesn’t look in it now, and he’s now making a fair few errors. Also a ball just fell out of his pocket, which appears to have a hole in it!
A superb return from Nadal move Murray very wide, and Nadal attacks ferociously with his forehand, but to no avail, sending a ball wide. Ad Murray. Nadal gets a point back though to deuce again. Murray holds by beating the errors out of Nadal. Murray appears to be now just carrying one ball at a time – it’s making him focus on serving first serves in! Murray takes the game, now it’s 4-2 Nadal.
Nadal takes his serve and the score to 5-2 making Murray serve to stay in the first set. Nadal breaks to go 6-2
It’s 1-1 Nadal serving in the second and it appears that Nadal is feeling a little heat from Murray as he double-faults and appears to struggle on his serve. However Nadal pulls through from 15-30 to win his serve.
Murray comes out serving strongly and hitting fabulous forehands in a row to take two quick points to 30-0. However Nadal is just too consistent and takes it to a breakpoint, which Murray scrapes back, only to have Nadal take it back to a break point again. Nadal takes the point, thank you.
“A hugely versatile artist” / “Part Radiohead, part Alex Lloyd and part Queen” / “…One very good album…” – GET IT HERE!
Nadal is basically going after Murray’s backhand side with a vengeance, and hits shot after pummelling shot to that side, until Murray’s backhand wilts. Whose wouldn’t?
Nadal is now 40-15 up on his serve, looking very confident and Murray looks a goner. 4-1 Nadal. Funny game really, scores don’t show the closeness of every point.
Murray takes the 6th game trying to pump himself up. Maybe not out just yet? And Murray collects a sneaky drop shot from Nadal and hits the winner! Only 15-30 though. Now 15-40, then 30-45 in a very long rally, Murray controls the last shot well. Now it’s deuce, and perhaps Murray’s last chance to get into the set. He hits the net though and rues missed chances. Nadal then takes the next point to hold serve. Nadal is just incrementally better and solid enough to push through.
Murray fights hard to take his own serve again, but it’s 5-3 Nadal serving!
Murray takes defense to attack and is now up 30-15 on Nadal’s serve. Nadal could get in a spot of bother. Which he gets out of with a really good drop shot. Then Nadal hits a high volley out wide, again, and Murray has break back point! Nadal takes it back with an excellent service and whipped forehand. Murray gets breakpoint again though with some powerful hitting. But an error sends him back to deuce again. Murray has Nadal guessing from the baseline but squanders another chance with an overhit forehand wide. But Murray refuse to lie down, sending a beautiful drop shot whilst Nadal is well back. Deuce. He knows he can beat Nadal on this surface at some point.
Very clever return from Murray out to Nadal’s forehand (first in a LONG while) wrong-footing Nadal. I imagine even if Murray wins this game, Nadal will break back or at the least win his next serve! Murray breaks BACK with a superbly constructed point. Nadal has a lot to be afraid of from this opponent, if not today then in future, here is someone with an equal ability to NOT LIE DOWN. No wonder these two are the thorns in Federer’s side.
I can’t imagine anyone else on tour winning back Nadal’s final service game when he clearly looked a winner. Like they say, Murray is pummelling Nadal’s backhand with his forehand. But Murray gets unlucky with a net-catch and Nadal goes up 30-15. 30-30. A bit of luck back for Murray as his ball now clips the net to go in and he’s up 40-30. Murray takes it with a good serve and forehand. It’s now 5-5!
Now Federer in this same position would let his emotions rule him and he would overhit and fluff the next two games against Nadal. Murray, stoic in the extreme, what will he do? Well he’s not attacking, but he is making silly mistakes, seems a bit tired after the last game. Both players look tired, equally so.
Nadal wins his serve, but now Murray is up 40-0 on his own serve, taking it to Nadal with powerful bossing groundstrokes.
I think what we can see here ladies and gents is that Nadal’s reign on clay will be in contention this year. Because Murray can handle it. Djokovic may also, we’ll see. Murray takes the game after a very long rally, great rally.
And Murray becomes the first player to take Nadal to a tie-break in Monte Carlo since 2006.
3-2 Nadal with some very deep returns now, but Murray takes both Nadal’s service points back from him with some very clever shot making – catching Nadal out on the positioning of the ball. 4-2 Nadal as Murray strikes a ball out. Murray strikes powerful serve and forehand to go 3-4. Now after a humoungously long rally, Nadal finally takes it with a shot down the line. 5-3 Nadal.
Murray strikes a stunning wide short-ish forehand, breaking a string in the process, taking it to 5-4. Murray never gives up. Nadal has someone to fear in that department now, as I said earlier. Nadal after a stunning rally, gets the final amazing shot back. Will Murray cave?
No – he doesn’t but Nadal just managed to give that little bit extra, forcing the error from Murray. But Murray has inched his way into Nadal’s head, and pushed him beyond what anyone has done lately on clay. He never gave up, and he ended up realising he had to play lots of attacking shots, as Federer does against Nadal. He executed well, Murray, in that second set, later on.
I think, as the commentators were saying, Murray has come a long way in two years. Nadal has remained very very good, and developed some, but nowhere near as much as Murray has. And Murray has a better serve. So who do you think will be winning most of their matches in the near future? You see, Nadal will probably know this. He is not at such a superior level to the other players that Federer was. This is why he is always pushing himself, wanting to learn more, hungry to become a better player. His serve needs to improve, he knows this. His volleys are very good, but can improve. The difference between his reign as number one and Federer’s will be dramatic. Federer, perhaps, may take some comfort knowing that Murray will be snatching some of Nadal’s Grand Slams, making it a little bit harder to reach his lofty figure. Nadal sits at 6 Grand Slams, Federer at 13.
After that performance, I don’t think I can honestly pick a winner for this year’s French Open, because while Nadal is the King of Clay, like Federer was King of Grass in 2006/07, the crowd is catching up quickly. For Federer, the crowd was a crowd of one – Nadal. But Nadal has several – Del Potro, Djokovic, Tsonga – and one of them, Murray, just fired a warning shot across Nadal’s bow.
