PDA

View Full Version : Djokovic vs. Nalbandian, who's better on clay?


deme08
04-27-2008, 09:50 AM
Both are semifinalists in Roland Garros. Both can challenge/beat Federer and Nadal on nearly all surfaces. A current No.3 versus a former No.3. Who has a better clay court game? Let's talk about clay only since it's currently the clay season.

Nadal_Freak
04-27-2008, 09:52 AM
Definitely Djokovic. Nalbandian has not been consistent enough on clay. Djokovic has much more upside as well.

Breaker
04-27-2008, 10:02 AM
Nalbandian has accomplished more on clay to this point and is just about unbeatable in Davis Cup on clay. At this stage I'll say David, though Djokovic obviously has time on his side.

flyer
04-27-2008, 10:05 AM
Hmmmmm, its completely depends on which Nalbandian shows up, on the whole I would go with Djokovic because Nalby is just was to inconsistent on any given day, on the whole I would say Nalby has more game though

gj011
04-27-2008, 10:13 AM
I was lookiig forward for Djokovic - Nalbandian match in the SF in MC to get some insight about this question, but Federer was not kind enough to let us see them :)

helloworld
04-27-2008, 10:45 AM
Good Nalbandian > Djokovic
Bad Nalbandian < Djokovic

NamRanger
04-27-2008, 11:38 AM
At their bests Nalbandian wins by a long shot. He was completely demolishing an inform Federer at RG 2006.

my_forehand
04-28-2008, 05:04 AM
At their bests Nalbandian wins by a long shot. He was completely demolishing an inform Federer at RG 2006.

What happened? Retired?

And to think I thought Federer got to the finals that year.

ATXtennisaddict
04-28-2008, 06:14 AM
I vote Nalbandian.

random guy
04-28-2008, 06:18 AM
Good Nalbandian > Djokovic
Bad Nalbandian < Djokovic

You got it right.

deme08
04-28-2008, 06:20 AM
Poll added:)

bluescreen
04-28-2008, 06:21 AM
as of right now, i'd say nalby only cuz he's posted more results on the dirt. i might change my opinion by next year though.

deme08
04-28-2008, 06:26 AM
What happened? Retired?

And to think I thought Federer got to the finals that year.

He beat Federer convincingly 6-3 in the first set and had many opportunities in the 2nd but lost the set anyhow. Then retired down 2-5 in the 3rd due to , if memory serves, an abdominal muscle injury.

BallzofSkill
04-28-2008, 06:26 AM
nalbandian. cause he can finish 2 sets.

deme08
04-30-2008, 12:00 PM
I was lookiig forward for Djokovic - Nalbandian match in the SF in MC to get some insight about this question, but Federer was not kind enough to let us see them :)

Another match up I can't wait to see is between Nadal and Nalbandian on clay.

Babb
04-30-2008, 12:04 PM
Good Nalbandian > Djokovic
Bad Nalbandian < Djokovic

This is true with any pro player.

Nadal_Freak
04-30-2008, 12:06 PM
Djokovic is clearly better. I guess he picked up a lot of haters last weekend though.

PROTENNIS63
04-30-2008, 12:06 PM
Nalby when he is on.

deme08
04-30-2008, 12:13 PM
Djokovic is clearly better. I guess he picked up a lot of haters last weekend though.

How is he better? He can't generate as much angle on his backhand as Nalbandian can. He tends to go for his shots which is not the way to play on clay. A solid grinding baseling game is where its at on clay, Nalbandian clearly has the edge with that. The only upside is Djokovic's shot has more pace (arguably) which is again neutralized by the clay surface.

Leublu tennis
04-30-2008, 12:17 PM
I said Nalbandian only because Djokovic says that he likes hard courts and even grass.

gj011
04-30-2008, 12:21 PM
How is he better? He can't generate as much angle on his backhand as Nalbandian can. Down the line shot not as good as Nalbandian's. Aestheticly Nalbandian wins it by a mile. The only upside is Djokovic backhand has more pace (arguably).

This thread is not about their backhand only.

deme08
04-30-2008, 12:24 PM
This thread is not about their backhand only.

Sorry I just realized that. Post editted. Still has a strong arguement though:)

Andres
04-30-2008, 12:26 PM
Definitely Djokovic. Nalbandian has not been consistent enough on clay. Djokovic has much more upside as well.
Nalbandian: TWO times French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups
Djokovic: ONE time French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups

Nalbandian: 19-6 record at French Open (76%)
Djokovic: 10-3 record at French Open (76.9%)

Nalbandian: 4 titles on clay
Djokovic: 2 titles on clay

Nalbandian: 105-47 record on clay (69.08%)
Djokovic: 40-18 record on clay (68.97%)

Nalbandian: 1 SF at Hamburg, 2 QF at Monte Carlo, 1 SF at Rome, 1 FINAL at Rome.
Djokovic: 1 QF at Hamburg, 1 SF at Monte Carlo, 1 QF at Rome

Nalbandian: 15-0 clay record on Davis Cup (100%)
Djokovic: 6-2 clay record on Davis Cup (75%)


Nalbandian has a better clay record than Djokovic on every stat, except the winnin % at the French Open, where Djokovic is only above him by less than 1%

Babb
04-30-2008, 12:28 PM
^^^^^
And thus, the argument ends. Facts are facts. But I'm sure someone will find an excuse...

edberg505
04-30-2008, 12:35 PM
Djokovic is clearly better. I guess he picked up a lot of haters last weekend though.

Ok, I'll bite, what makes him clearly better on clay? You see you need to back up statements such as this with proof.

edberg505
04-30-2008, 12:37 PM
Nalbandian: TWO times French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups
Djokovic: ONE time French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups

Nalbandian: 19-6 record at French Open (76%)
Djokovic: 10-3 record at French Open (76.9%)

Nalbandian: 4 titles on clay
Djokovic: 2 titles on clay

Nalbandian: 105-47 record on clay (69.08%)
Djokovic: 40-18 record on clay (68.97%)

Nalbandian: 1 SF at Hamburg, 2 QF at Monte Carlo, 1 SF at Rome, 1 FINAL at Rome.
Djokovic: 1 QF at Hamburg, 1 SF at Monte Carlo, 1 QF at Rome

Nalbandian: 15-0 clay record on Davis Cup (100%)
Djokovic: 6-2 clay record on Davis Cup (75%)


Nalbandian has a better clay record than Djokovic on every stat, except the winnin % at the French Open, where Djokovic is only above him by less than 1%

Ahh, now this is how one has facts to back up their argument.

Nadal_Freak
04-30-2008, 02:13 PM
Ok, I'll bite, what makes him clearly better on clay? You see you need to back up statements such as this with proof.
Just look at last years clay court season. Before that doesn't matter as that is history. Djokovic got to the Semis last year. Where was Nalbandian?

veroniquem
04-30-2008, 02:27 PM
Another match up I can't wait to see is between Nadal and Nalbandian on clay.
Me too. It really scares me but I still want to see it. David is the only dangerous player that Rafa has never played on clay yet.

edberg505
04-30-2008, 02:35 PM
Just look at last years clay court season. Before that doesn't matter as that is history. Djokovic got to the Semis last year. Where was Nalbandian?

Well, he lost to the eventual semi-finalst. That's where he was while Djokovic was busy navigating through a cream-puff draw.

Andres
04-30-2008, 03:07 PM
Just look at last years clay court season. Before that doesn't matter as that is history. Djokovic got to the Semis last year. Where was Nalbandian?
When was the last time Djokovic won a clay title?
Where was Novak when Nalbandian won a title and was runner-up in back to back clay events this February? He was fishing in Monaco.

zagor
04-30-2008, 03:15 PM
Just look at last years clay court season. Before that doesn't matter as that is history. Djokovic got to the Semis last year. Where was Nalbandian?

Nalbandian lost to Davydenko who was very close in beating Federer and getting to the FO finals himself last year.In my opinion Kolja was a much tougher draw then Andreev or Verdasco.

Nadal_Monfils
04-30-2008, 04:21 PM
Nalbandian: TWO times French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups
Djokovic: ONE time French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups

Nalbandian: 19-6 record at French Open (76%)
Djokovic: 10-3 record at French Open (76.9%)

Nalbandian: 4 titles on clay
Djokovic: 2 titles on clay

Nalbandian: 105-47 record on clay (69.08%)
Djokovic: 40-18 record on clay (68.97%)

Nalbandian: 1 SF at Hamburg, 2 QF at Monte Carlo, 1 SF at Rome, 1 FINAL at Rome.
Djokovic: 1 QF at Hamburg, 1 SF at Monte Carlo, 1 QF at Rome

Nalbandian: 15-0 clay record on Davis Cup (100%)
Djokovic: 6-2 clay record on Davis Cup (75%)


Nalbandian has a better clay record than Djokovic on every stat, except the winnin % at the French Open, where Djokovic is only above him by less than 1%


Nalbandian is only barely ahead in almost all of these stats because he has been a pro longer and therefore has played many more matches on clay. The stats Djokovic have put up in a relatively short period of time are more impressive than the stats Nalbandian has recorded over a longer period of time.

fer
04-30-2008, 04:30 PM
Top five players on clay.

1 Nadal.
2 Federer.
3 Ferrer.
4 Davydenko.
5 Djokovic.

stormholloway
04-30-2008, 07:06 PM
I was lookiig forward for Djokovic - Nalbandian match in the SF in MC to get some insight about this question, but Federer was not kind enough to let us see them :)

Djokovic wasn't kind enough to let us see him play Federer either.

stormholloway
04-30-2008, 07:09 PM
Nalbandian: TWO times French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups
Djokovic: ONE time French Open Semifinalist. No runner-ups

Nalbandian: 19-6 record at French Open (76%)
Djokovic: 10-3 record at French Open (76.9%)

Nalbandian: 4 titles on clay
Djokovic: 2 titles on clay

Nalbandian: 105-47 record on clay (69.08%)
Djokovic: 40-18 record on clay (68.97%)

Nalbandian: 1 SF at Hamburg, 2 QF at Monte Carlo, 1 SF at Rome, 1 FINAL at Rome.
Djokovic: 1 QF at Hamburg, 1 SF at Monte Carlo, 1 QF at Rome

Nalbandian: 15-0 clay record on Davis Cup (100%)
Djokovic: 6-2 clay record on Davis Cup (75%)


Nalbandian has a better clay record than Djokovic on every stat, except the winnin % at the French Open, where Djokovic is only above him by less than 1%

Right, but Djokovic is a different animal now. Stats are all about the past. The question, I assume, refers to the present.

MajinX
04-30-2008, 07:42 PM
Nalbandian is only barely ahead in almost all of these stats because he has been a pro longer and therefore has played many more matches on clay. The stats Djokovic have put up in a relatively short period of time are more impressive than the stats Nalbandian has recorded over a longer period of time.

its much harder to remain consistent with ur stats esp on the pro tour and for many years, there are many players who play extremely well for 1 or 2 years then level off, sorta like roddick but hes still pretty high on the rankings, so right now saying djokovic is impressive because he made his records in a short amount is not a good agruement. If he has the same percentage of wins and loses over lets say 4 years, then he would be very good.

Nadal_Freak
04-30-2008, 07:47 PM
Top five players on clay.

1 Nadal.
2 Federer.
3 Ferrer.
4 Davydenko.
5 Djokovic.
I would put it.
1. Nadal
2. Federer
3. Djokovic
4. Davydenko
5. Ferrer
6. Nalbandian

edberg505
04-30-2008, 07:51 PM
Right, but Djokovic is a different animal now. Stats are all about the past. The question, I assume, refers to the present.

Even if it is the present Nalbandian has a better clay court record than Djokovic right now. The only reason Nalbandian didn't make it as far as Djokovic did in the MC Masters is because he ran into Federer before Novak.

Nadal_Freak
04-30-2008, 08:00 PM
Even if it is the present Nalbandian has a better clay court record than Djokovic right now. The only reason Nalbandian didn't make it as far as Djokovic did in the MC Masters is because he ran into Federer before Novak.
Clay is Nalbandian's worst surface. The only place where Nalbandian is better than Djokovic is indoors. Conditioning isn't as much of an issue indoors. Federer was able to beat Nalbandian 6-2 6-2 in the last 2 sets. Nalbandian becomes dedicated to fitness again and he'll do well but the Semis is as far as he goes at the French Open or any clay court even with Nadal and Federer in it.

flyer
04-30-2008, 08:10 PM
^^^I dont think Nalbys at his best on clay either but if hes in form he can beat anybody on clay, even Nadal if he has an off day

edberg505
04-30-2008, 08:20 PM
Clay is Nalbandian's worst surface. The only place where Nalbandian is better than Djokovic is indoors. Conditioning isn't as much of an issue indoors. Federer was able to beat Nalbandian 6-2 6-2 in the last 2 sets. Nalbandian becomes dedicated to fitness again and he'll do well but the Semis is as far as he goes at the French Open or any clay court even with Nadal and Federer in it.

Hey, all I have to say is numbers don't lie. And yes I'm talking about this year.

NamRanger
04-30-2008, 08:46 PM
Clay is Nalbandian's worst surface. The only place where Nalbandian is better than Djokovic is indoors. Conditioning isn't as much of an issue indoors. Federer was able to beat Nalbandian 6-2 6-2 in the last 2 sets. Nalbandian becomes dedicated to fitness again and he'll do well but the Semis is as far as he goes at the French Open or any clay court even with Nadal and Federer in it.



Clay is not Nalbandian's worst surface. Grass is, and the only reason why Nalbandian got to the final of Wimbledon in 2002 was because of a paper thin draw for him at the bottom of the draw.


Outside of 2002, Nalbandian has done NOTHING on grass.


And don't even argue that Nalbandian is good on grass, because he didn't play a single good grass player in 2002. He has 0 titles on grass. He has his best results indoors because of his ability to hit so cleanly on the rise, and clay because he has one of the best dropshots in the game, and is extremely good at creating angles out of nothing.

jgreen06
04-30-2008, 09:33 PM
nalbandian easy

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
04-30-2008, 09:39 PM
Djokovic just became a huge force in men's tennis last year, carried over into 2008 hard court season and now he's a better clay court player than the South American Nalbandian on clay? :confused:

Yes he made the French Open semifinals last year, David has also done the same. If Nalbandian took fitness a little more seriously, do any of us realize what kind of damage he could've actually done?

I am not a fan of Nalbandian, but what am I missing here? :-?

Someone please fill me in....

Stchamps
05-01-2008, 06:46 AM
Nalbandian just got roflstomped by Wawrinka. I think Nalbandian is the most overrated person on this forum.

zagor
05-01-2008, 06:47 AM
Nalbandian just got roflstomped by Wawrinka. I think Nalbandian is the most overrated person on this forum.

That honor belongs to Safin.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 06:53 AM
Hey, all I have to say is numbers don't lie. And yes I'm talking about this year.
Yes they don't lie. 6-3 6-1 against Wawrinka. :lol:

NamRanger
05-01-2008, 06:57 AM
Yes they don't lie. 6-3 6-1 against Wawrinka. :lol:


Nalbandian has the most titles on clay. He has two SF's at the French Open. Tell me he's not good on clay again?

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 07:00 AM
Nalbandian has the most titles on clay. He has two SF's at the French Open. Tell me he's not good on clay again?
Nalbandian is 26 and Djokovic is 20. Yeah a little disadvantage there. I'll take Djokovic in a match. I would take Wawrinka as well. ;)

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
05-01-2008, 07:04 AM
Nalbandian just got roflstomped by Wawrinka. I think Nalbandian is the most overrated person on this forum.

Marat Safin reigns supreme in that category.

Stchamps
05-01-2008, 07:12 AM
Nalbandian has the most titles on clay. He has two SF's at the French Open. Tell me he's not good on clay again?

No one said he's not good. We're just saying if he were to play Djokovic right now, Djoker would win.

I think Safin's popularity has gone downhill this year. Too many first and second round losses.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 08:30 AM
Yes they don't lie. 6-3 6-1 against Wawrinka. :lol:

You are an obnoxious little sh*t aren't you. I usually don't care about Nadal winning the FO. But this year I will give anything to see Nadal not win this damn title just to hear your excuses. You'd probably ball up into a little corner and have a nervous breakdown if your beloved Nadal doesn't bring home the FO title. So here's hoping someone hands him a beat down.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 08:31 AM
Nalbandian just got roflstomped by Wawrinka. I think Nalbandian is the most overrated person on this forum.

Tell that to Federer and Nadal.

MajinX
05-01-2008, 08:43 AM
Yes they don't lie. 6-3 6-1 against Wawrinka. :lol:

wawrinka's game is obviously not a good match for nalbandian, their head to had is 5-2 now. and he is the number 2 swiss player.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 08:44 AM
You are an obnoxious little sh*t aren't you. I usually don't care about Nadal winning the FO. But this year I will give anything to see Nadal not win this damn title just to hear your excuses. You'd probably ball up into a little corner and have a nervous breakdown if your beloved Nadal doesn't bring home the FO title. So here's hoping someone hands him a beat down.
Resorting to name-calling I see. Yeah your precious Nalbandian let you down and now you are throwing a hissy fit. Djokovic is simply better than Nalbandian. You must have something against Djokovic to not see that. He earned his spot at number 3.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 08:45 AM
Tell that to Federer and Nadal.
There is quite a difference between Indoor hardcourts and clay. Nalbandian hasn't beaten either Federer or Nadal on clay.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 08:54 AM
Resorting to name-calling I see. Yeah your precious Nalbandian let you down and now you are throwing a hissy fit. Djokovic is simply better than Nalbandian. You must have something against Djokovic to not see that. He earned his spot at number 3.

My friend, it isn't name calling if it's truth. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people here that agree with me. Everyone knows you are the biggest troll on this board and I seriously doubt there is any dispute to that fact. I don't even think you are even a fan of tennis. I bet if Nadal were to retire next year (hoping he doesn't) we would probably never see you on these boards again. In the past 2 min while typing this post I have probably forgotten more tennis than you will ever know. And I'm not a Nalbandian fan by the way, I am a fan of tennis. I am just as likely to go out and watch a couple of 3.5's play tennis as I am to go out and watch a couple of pros. Do you even play tennis?

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:01 AM
My friend, it isn't name calling if it's truth. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people here that agree with me. Everyone knows you are the biggest troll on this board and I seriously doubt there is any dispute to that fact. I don't even think you are even a fan of tennis. I bet if Nadal were to retire next year (hoping he doesn't) we would probably never see you on these boards again. In the past 2 min while typing this post I have probably forgotten more tennis than you will ever know. And I'm not a Nalbandian fan by the way, I am a fan of tennis. I am just as likely to go out and watch a couple of 3.5's play tennis as I am to go out and watch a couple of pros. Do you even play tennis?
It's not the truth. Read my posts. I have plenty of intelligent tennis talk. I was a Agassi fan in the 90's and now a Nadal fan. Nothing wrong with having favorite players. I always disliked Edberg. He needs to get a personality. ;)

Serpententacle
05-01-2008, 09:06 AM
That honor belongs to Safin.

Yeah, but Safin's been washed up for a while.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:07 AM
It's not the truth. Read my posts. I have plenty of intelligent tennis talk. I was a Agassi fan in the 90's and now a Nadal fan. Nothing wrong with having favorite players. I always disliked Edberg. He needs to get a personality. ;)

Sure its the truth and I'm not the only one that thinks so. Edberg doesn't need a personality, he has 6 slams and has been to the finals of every single one of them. Come and find me when Nadal does that friendo.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:12 AM
Sure its the truth and I'm not the only one that thinks so. Edberg doesn't need a personality, he has 6 slams and has been to the finals of every single one of them. Come and find me when Nadal does that friendo.
Edberg didn't have to deal with the GOAT. Most of his titles came before the dominance of Sampras. Nadal would probably have 2 Wimbledon's right now if it wasn't for Federer. Btw Edberg's style would not suit well to todays game. Too many quality counter-punchers.

dh003i
05-01-2008, 09:13 AM
To say that Djokovic is better on clay than Nalbandian is laughable. Who played Federer better at MC? Nalbandian. He at least managed to win a set, and, ya know, not retire.

Come on, Nalbandian is a pretty good clay-court player. Djokovic is only good on clay against weak opponents.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:16 AM
To say that Djokovic is better on clay than Nalbandian is laughable. Who played Federer better at MC? Nalbandian. He at least managed to win a set, and, ya know, not retire.

Come on, Nalbandian is a pretty good clay-court player. Djokovic is only good on clay against weak opponents.
Federer's confidence level was sky high after beating Nalbandian. Djokovic got Federer's best. Go back a couple rounds and Federer almost lost to Hidalgo. I thought Djokovic played alright against Federer but Fed was on fire.

veroniquem
05-01-2008, 09:18 AM
Has Djoko ever won a clay court tournament? If yes, which one(s)?

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:20 AM
Edberg didn't have to deal with the GOAT. Most of his titles came before the dominance of Sampras. Nadal would probably have 2 Wimbledon's right now if it wasn't for Federer. Btw Edberg's style would not suit well to todays game. Too many quality counter-punchers.

Sampras and Edberg played 14 times. So I have no idea what you are talking about. And he also played in the Wilander, Courier and Lendl era so you can save that BS. Edberg play and won on grass when it was REAL grass, polar opposites of clay and he still made it to the finals of all 4 slams. And I would love to see Nadal play a true serve and volleyer.

zagor
05-01-2008, 09:21 AM
Has Djoko ever won a clay court tournament? If yes, which one(s)?

He won Estoril last year,he beat Gasquet in the final.

veroniquem
05-01-2008, 09:23 AM
Sampras and Edberg played 14 times. So I have no idea what you are talking about. And he also played in the Wilander, Courier and Lendl era so you can save that BS. Edberg play and won on grass when it was REAL grass, polar opposites of clay and he still made it to the finals of all 4 slams. And I would love to see Nadal play a true serve and volleyer.
It would be like Agassi-Edberg, a pass fest!

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:24 AM
It would be like Agassi-Edberg, a pass fest!

LOL, the very fact that you are comparing Nadal and Agassi is laughable. Nadal didn't even beat Chris Guccione

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:25 AM
Sampras and Edberg played 14 times. So I have no idea what you are talking about. And he also played in the Wilander, Courier and Lendl era so you can save that BS. Edberg play and won on grass when it was REAL grass, polar opposites of clay and he still made it to the finals of all 4 slams. And I would love to see Nadal play a true serve and volleyer.
Sampras was not great on grass until about 1994. By than Edberg racked up enough titles for you to brag about. Courier and Lendl were non-factors on fast surfaces. (grass) Becker was solid but not close to dominating what Fed does these days. The US Open and Wimbledon were more winnable back than when there wasn't a player that dominated the fast surfaces.

dh003i
05-01-2008, 09:28 AM
Federer's confidence level was sky high after beating Nalbandian. Djokovic got Federer's best. Go back a couple rounds and Federer almost lost to Hidalgo. I thought Djokovic played alright against Federer but Fed was on fire.

Arguably, Federer played just as well if not better against Nalbandian. To be sure, his confidence was sky-high after that, but so what? Djokovic's should have been too, after he'd just crushed everyone he faced (although maybe he was factoring in that they weren't really particularly great clay-court players).

I just don't get how you can say Djoko is better on clay than Nalby. His game doesn't suit clay very well, imho.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:30 AM
Sampras was not great on grass until about 1994. By than Edberg racked up enough titles for you to brag about. Courier and Lendl were non-factors on fast surfaces. (grass) Becker was solid but not close to dominating what Fed does these days. The US Open and Wimbledon were more winnable back than when there wasn't a player that dominated the fast surfaces.

LOL, whatever makes you sleep better at night. Like I said, come and find me when Nadal matches Edberg's feat. Hell, come and find me the next time he wins a title outside of clay. Hopefully that won't be a while.

Oh and by the way, since when is making multiple US Opens and Wimby finals make Lendl a non factor. Like I said, you know nothing about tennis.

veroniquem
05-01-2008, 09:30 AM
LOL, the very fact that you are comparing Nadal and Agassi is laughable. Nadal didn't even beat Chris Guccione
He beat lots of other people and got close to beating Fed, remember?

veroniquem
05-01-2008, 09:34 AM
LOL, whatever makes you sleep better at night. Like I said, come and find me when Nadal matches Edberg's feat. Hell, come and find me the next time he wins a title outside of clay. Hopefully that won't be a while.

Oh and by the way, since when is making multiple US Opens and Wimby finals make Lendl a non factor. Like I said, you know nothing about tennis.
It's a good thing Edberg is retired. Can you imagine what would happen if I told you to call me next time Edberg wins a tournament on clay?!

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:38 AM
LOL, whatever makes you sleep better at night. Like I said, come and find me when Nadal matches Edberg's feat. Hell, come and find me the next time he wins a title outside of clay. Hopefully that won't be a while.

Oh and by the way, since when is making multiple US Opens and Wimby finals make Lendl a non factor. Like I said, you know nothing about tennis.
Lendl being a threat on grass? That's news to me. I hear he has 0 titles there. lol It is laughable to compare any player of that generation pre-Sampras to Federer on fast courts.

dh003i
05-01-2008, 09:39 AM
Nadal_Freak,

Edberg was Federer's idol growing up. McEnroe was of course awesome on grass. There were some really great grass-court players in the 80s.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:41 AM
He beat lots of other people and got close to beating Fed, remember?

I have no idea what you are going on about here.

It's a good thing Edberg is retired. Can you imagine what would happen if I told you to call me next time Edberg wins a tournament on clay?!

Hey my friend Edberg has won titles on clay. But whatever you say. But come and find me when he wins something other than a clay court title.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:42 AM
Nadal_Freak,

Edberg was Federer's idol growing up. McEnroe was of course awesome on grass. There were some really great grass-court players in the 80s.
Late 80's-Early 90's was where Edberg got those titles. McEnroe was past his prime and Becker, young Sampras, and Ivanisevic were about it. Yes it wasn't easy but much more achievable than todays field with Federer and Djokovic dominating the fast surfaces. Especially Fed.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:43 AM
Lendl being a threat on grass? That's news to me. I hear he has 0 titles there. lol It is laughable to compare any player of that generation pre-Sampras to Federer on fast courts.

I'm willing to bet you that Nadal will never match any of Lendls numbers either since you think Lendl was a nothing. Oh, remind me of how many titles Nadal has on grass? Yeah, that's what I thought.

vive le beau jeu !
05-01-2008, 09:46 AM
Sampras and Edberg played 14 times. So I have no idea what you are talking about. And he also played in the Wilander, Courier and Lendl era so you can save that BS. Edberg play and won on grass when it was REAL grass, polar opposites of clay and he still made it to the finals of all 4 slams. And I would love to see Nadal play a true serve and volleyer.
... it would be absolutely ridiculous to question the quality of edberg's opponents during his career ! he had to face many tough guys...

(by the way... why 505 ?) ;)

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:46 AM
Late 80's-Early 90's was where Edberg got those titles. McEnroe was past his prime and Becker, young Sampras, and Ivanisevic were about it. Yes it wasn't easy but much more achievable than todays field with Federer and Djokovic dominating the fast surfaces. Especially Fed.

Djokovic? Dude, Djokovic just started winning titles last year. So Djokovic is the reason Nadal doesn't have any hardcourt and grass titles? Gimme a break.

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:46 AM
I'm willing to bet you that Nadal will never match any of Lendls numbers either since you think Lendl was a nothing. Oh, remind me of how many titles Nadal has on grass? Yeah, that's what I thought.
Lendl dominated the surfaces that weren't grass. Fed and Djokovic would destroy Edberg's chances of winning titles as well. You win as much as the field will let you. Unless you are close to GOAT status which Edberg and Agassi aren't.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:47 AM
... it would be absolutely ridiculous to question the quality of edberg's opponents during his career ! he had to face many tough guys...

(by the way... why 505 ?) ;)

lol, it's the area code for New Mexico, which is where I live.

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:48 AM
Lendl dominated the surfaces that weren't grass. Fed and Djokovic would destroy Edberg's chances of winning titles as well. You win as much as the field will let you. Unless you are close to GOAT status which Edberg and Agassi aren't.

First you said it was fast surfaces now it's grass he didn't dominate, which one is it?

Nadal_Freak
05-01-2008, 09:52 AM
First you said it was fast surfaces now it's grass he didn't dominate, which one is it?
FAST SURFACES equal GRASS if you didn't know that. US OPEN Is MEDIUM-FAST but I wouldn't call that lightning quick. Becker usually beat Edberg from what I remember as well and Federer>Becker. ;)

edberg505
05-01-2008, 09:56 AM
FAST SURFACES equal GRASS if you didn't know that. US OPEN Is MEDIUM-FAST but I wouldn't call that lightning quick. Becker usually beat Edberg from what I remember as well and Federer>Becker. ;)

Hey, whatever flats your boat. Just come and find me when he wins a slam that isn't on clay and gets 6 slams and a gold medal. Until then:

Edberg is better!
Edberg is better!
Edberg is better!

deme08
05-01-2008, 11:47 AM
Edberg is better!
Edberg is better!
Edberg is better!

Agree! Until Nadal beats 6 grand slams titles, become No.1 player of the world(harder now that Djokovic has emerged and Fed still looking to dominate) and

Singles Record: 806 - 270

Singles Titles: 42

Doubles Titles: 18

Until then - Edberg>Nadal

Strings And Things
05-01-2008, 11:58 AM
Hmmmmm, its completely depends on which Nalbandian shows up, on the whole I would go with Djokovic because Nalby is just was to inconsistent on any given day, on the whole I would say Nalby has more game thoughI agree with you 100%. If I were to go with the averages, it would definitely be a safer bet to go with Djoker.

Yes Nalby is insane when he's on (aggressive shotmaker, accurate, services winners/point setups), but he's not always there.

ruski07
05-01-2008, 05:32 PM
nalby just got snipped by stan, he needs to work on his speed and fitness sumfin cronic