Rafael Nadal: Why the Defending Champion Will Not Win Wimbledon in 2011

It wasn't long ago that the big question in the world of tennis was if Roger Federer was the greatest player of all time. He was racking up Grand Slam titles at a record pace, and no one seemed able to defeat him.

Then along came Federer's kryptonite in the form of Rafael Nadal. Nadal has dominated their head- to-head matchups as of late and is on a Grand Slam binge of his own.

After winning the French Open a few weeks ago, Nadal looks unstoppable. He has yet to lose a set at this year's Wimbledon and, in fact, hasn't lost a match at the All England Club since the finals in 2007.

With Nadal playing at the top of his game, it seems like a foregone conclusion he will cruise to his fourth consecutive Wimbledon victory.

And that's the problem—it all looks and feels too perfect.

Whenever something seems too good to be true, it generally is. Just like the Patriots in 2007, the USC Trojans in 2006 or the UNLV Runnin' Rebels in 1991, Nadal appears unbeatable, but I think he'll come up just a bit short.

It has nothing to do with Nadal's game and everything to do with fate. On paper, no one has an advantage over him, but I can't help but get the feeling that something unforeseen is going to play a big part in the outcome of the Wimbledon finals. It's usually a lucky or unfortunate bounce that turns the tide in these situations.

I'm probably a fool for betting against Nadal, and I don't have any one particular player in mind who I think will beat him (I'll take the field), but experience has taught me things don't always happen the way you think they will.

If my intuition is correct, Rafael Nadal will lose an epic five-set match in the finals. If I'm wrong, Nadal will add more hardware to his impressive collection and become the modern day Bjorn Borg.

Your thoughts?