In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer

Hi atalpanditgmat,

Answer is Indeed A.

This question effectively describes the importance of understanding Meaning, else you will be confused with the option.

Meaning

This is Cause -Effect
Cause - Nadal Won
Effect - shocked the world and won the first tittle.

Now, check the reasoning above.

Thank you Guys, I was confused about the tense whether simple past is better or the past perfect in this case....Anyways looking forward for more comments....

Between a & d i picked d.If i am wrong inform me

time sequencing is needed here else how wud i know what happened first ? was it the beating of federer or the fact that nadal won french open .hence D is best bet here

Choice A for me.
Bet is between D and A. In D there is time sequencing - which is not relevant as both the events are not co related. Also, if we use "had won" we need "shocked" (past perfect with simple past only)- but we have "shocking" which is acting as modifier and not verb. Thus, this choice is incorrect.

Hope I could add 2 cents....

Found a thread in another forum that says the OA is D...

I think ‘already’ alone is not sufficient to decide timeline. There are many correct usages which use both already along with the past perfect.

When Nigeria achieved full independence in 1960 it had already established a federal political structure that consisted of three regions based on the three major population clusters within its borders

We don’t say -- When Nigeria achieved full independence in 1960 it already established a federal political structure
"I had already done the shopping by the time she came home."
We don’t say "I already did the shopping by the time she came home
"I was late for work; by the time I arrived the client had already left."
We don’t say "I was late for work, by the time I arrived the client already left."
I'd visited the city many times before.
We don’t say, I visited the city many times before
So I feel that we do require using the past perfect in this case as done in D. If we go deeper into the meaning, then you may see that it is illogical to limit Rafael’s victory to just four French titles, in which case, his winning becomes a closed chapter. Since it is also likely to be a continuing affair after 2008, we may best use a present perfect – has already won four times- But to use a present perfect in a sentence, where the main clause is in past tense will be blatant shift of tense. Hence it is safe to use had already won’.

P. S; In fact, Rafael won French title for three more years from 2010 through 2012, a feat that included a record seven wins in a decade . The next French title is not even a month away, where his winning may not be as big a news as his losing.

In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

A. In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

D. In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open, which he had already won 4 times. Winning the French Open happened before the Wimbledon final (in which Nadal beats Federer). Hence, had + simple past.




Kudos. Gimme.

Thank You Daagh. Every time I go through a question, i wish i could see your explanation because it is convincing. In this case I translated the question in my own language and went for 'D'. I am glad this works soemtime.....

Guys, This is a veritas question and OA is D.
past perfect is necessary since nadal had already won French Open 4 times before Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets in the 2008 Wimbledon final.

Can you share the method of POE used to eliminate other options?

In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

(A) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

(B) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocked the tennis world, and won his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he had already won 4 times.

(C) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocked the tennis world, and he won his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he had already won 4 times.

(D) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open, which he had already won 4 times.

(E) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, which shocked the tennis world and gave him his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open, which he had already won 4 times.

In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

(A) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he already won 4 times.

(B) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocked the tennis world, and won his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he had already won 4 times.

(C) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocked the tennis world, and he won his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title, which he had already won 4 times.

(D) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world and winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open, which he had already won 4 times.

(E) In the 2008 Wimbledon final, Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in 5 sets, which shocked the tennis world and gave him his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open, which he had already won 4 times.

IMO:-D

A:- Verb error. Since RN had already won French Open before he beat RF so sentence needs past perfect
B:- clause "Shocked the Tennis world......... " expresses result of previous clause so it needs verb participial(ing) Noun modifier. Choice B corrected Verb error
C:- Error same as "B". Also no need of "He" as RN is subject of sentence
D:- Correct usage of ing modifier and verb error.
E:- Which erroneously refers to sets.

Experts , plz validate my reasoning.

in option D, which he had already won, is modifier not related event , so how past perfect is valid use over here?

An earlier event may lie within a modifier as well - in that case past perfect is alright within a modifier.
Of course the two events are related each other. An excerpt ( from Manhattan SC guide) would make it clear what kind of events are considered not to have bearing with each other:

"Wrong: Joe LEARNED about an epoch in which dinosaurs HAD WALKED the earth.
Right: Joe LEARNED about an epoch in which dinosaurs WALKED the earth.
In the first example, the Past Perfect had walked is unnecessary. Although the action had walked does take place earlier than the action learned, the earlier action does not have a direct bearing on the context of the later action. The sequence of time does not need to be clarified or emphasized. Thus, the Past Perfect is considered wrong in this context."

Firstly I saw this match and was disappointed when Roger lost. So I can relate to the term "shocking".

A and D for me - prefer D because use of past perfect correctly signifies the sequence. Also, I feel which should touch French Open rather than the title.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

In a sentence correction problem with this much underlined and so many different decision points, it is important to find some difference that allows you to eliminate two to three answer choices quickly. In this problem, that decision point is the the choice between "French Open" in (A), (B), and (C) and "French Open title" in (D) and (E). It is relatively easy to notice that difference when scanning the answer choices and the error is easy to understand once you spot it: "winning his first Grand Slam tournament other than the French Open title" incorrectly suggests that a "title" is a "tournament" This is an apples to orange comparison and is corrected by changing "French Open title" to "French Open." With that change you now have a proper tournament to tournament comparison.

After eliminating (A), (B), and (C) you must find a difference to leverage between (D) and (E). That difference is the choice between "...in 5 sets, shocking the tennis world" and "...in 5 sets, which shocked the tennis world". In (E) the "which" clause following "sets" is being used improperly: when using "which" clauses they should modify the noun directly beside them (or extremely close to them) and clearly "5 sets" cannot be properly modified by the relative clause. Also the "gave him his first tournament.." is an awkward construction that contains illogical predication: you could say "gave him his first tournament title or victory" but "gave him his first tournament" is illogical. Answer choice (D) uses the correct (but confusing to students!) participial phrase "shocking...and winning.." to modify the subject Nadal after you learn what he did ("beat Federer in 5 sets"). Correct answer is (D).