PDA

View Full Version : Why Nadal is superior to Fed


ArrowSmith
09-14-2009, 10:13 AM
Nadal has won 6/22 slams he's competed in. Federer had won 3 out out of his first 22 slam events. So why the crying and anguish from Rafa-tards? Their man is WAY ahead of Fed at the same age.

goforgold99
09-14-2009, 10:14 AM
Fact of the matter is: Nadal has a good H2H against Rog because of all the clay court matches. Take them out and Fed is ahead

HellBunni
09-14-2009, 10:17 AM
players peak at different ages.

it is meaningless to compare what player X and player Y has accomplished at a certain age.

Frankauc
09-14-2009, 10:18 AM
why would you take the claycourt matches out?

if so, just take the grass matches out too, cause its Fed best surface. Nadal would have 2 more slams...

........what a poor post.

jms007
09-14-2009, 10:20 AM
He has less time, and arguably more competition.
He may get 10-11 GS before its over.

Omni
09-14-2009, 10:21 AM
Fact of the matter is: Nadal has a good H2H against Rog because of all the clay court matches. Take them out and Fed is ahead

Then shouldn't fact of the matter be that if Roger is the GOAT then he should be capable of mastering all surfaces? Seriously, if anyone is the Greatest of all time, then clay and one player should not be such an issue for you.

three eights
09-14-2009, 10:23 AM
Nadal has won 6/22 slams he's competed in. Federer had won 3 out out of his first 22 slam events. So why the crying and anguish from Rafa-tards? Their man is WAY ahead of Fed at the same age.

Federer was a late bloomer, so what?! Also Nada can forget about being #1 at age 29, so your hypothesis sucks.

Rippy
09-14-2009, 10:25 AM
Players peak at different ages. [/thread]

BigServer1
09-14-2009, 10:26 AM
Then shouldn't fact of the matter be that if Roger is the GOAT then he should be capable of mastering all surfaces? Seriously, if anyone is the Greatest of all time, then clay and one player should not be such an issue for you.

Tell that to Sampras with clay and Borg with HCs.

EtePras
09-14-2009, 10:28 AM
Chang and Becker must be the GOATs.

ArrowSmith
09-14-2009, 10:30 AM
I was just trying to be kind to ********s.

BreakPoint
09-14-2009, 10:32 AM
Nadal has won 6/22 slams he's competed in. Federer had won 3 out out of his first 22 slam events. So why the crying and anguish from Rafa-tards? Their man is WAY ahead of Fed at the same age.
Yeah, but Nadal won't be winning Grand Slams at 27 or 28 like Federer is currently doing. In fact, I'd be surprised if Nadal won any more Grand Slams from now on at all.

BreakPoint
09-14-2009, 10:34 AM
why would you take the claycourt matches out?

if so, just take the grass matches out too, cause its Fed best surface. Nadal would have 2 more slams...

........what a poor post.
Because Federer is good enough to make clay court finals while Nadal is not good enough to make hardcourt finals, and for many years, they could only meet in the final because they were always seeded #1 and #2.

talock
09-14-2009, 10:37 AM
Nadal has won 6/22 slams he's competed in. Federer had won 3 out out of his first 22 slam events. So why the crying and anguish from Rafa-tards? Their man is WAY ahead of Fed at the same age.

the BIGGEST problem with this arguement is that in a year it won't be valid. yes, it took roger a lot longer to win his first, but after that, it was like floodgates opening...

for instance, 3/22 is correct, but also 4/23, 5/26, 6/27, 7/28, 8/30, 9/31, 10/32...

do you really see Nadal winning 4 out of the next 10 slams given whats happened in the past year? how about 6 of the next 13? the crazy thing is, even if he did do that, he'd STILL be at least 3 short of Fed assuming Fed wins zero slams from here on out (including today).

Lionheart392
09-14-2009, 10:37 AM
The OP is totally right.
Also, at age 19 Navratilova had won 0 slams. Iva Majoli on the other hand won 1 slam at age 19. She was WAY ahead of Navratilova at the same age. Therefore, Majoli is clearly the superior player.
:rolleyes:

joeri888
09-14-2009, 10:39 AM
Nadal might become the superior player over time, he isn't at this moment. Maybe he is at this moment, if you wanna bet on Federer winning less than 6 games tonight.

namelessone
09-14-2009, 10:40 AM
Is this thread really necessary? You are just feeding the trolls so don't be surprised when they show up.

akv89
09-14-2009, 10:44 AM
Nadal has won 6/22 slams he's competed in. Federer had won 3 out out of his first 22 slam events. So why the crying and anguish from Rafa-tards? Their man is WAY ahead of Fed at the same age.

Federer won 4 out of his first 22 majors. Let's come back to this stat in three years. By that time, 12 more majors will have passed by. Federer won 12 of his first 34 majors.

BHud
09-14-2009, 12:20 PM
Of course, 6=15 (soon to be 16), no?

P_Agony
09-14-2009, 12:26 PM
Is this thread really necessary? You are just feeding the trolls so don't be surprised when they show up.

I agree, this thread just creats mess.

ArrowSmith
09-14-2009, 12:27 PM
I like confusing Rafa-*****.

bhallic24
09-14-2009, 12:46 PM
nadal is clearly better because he's the only one that can get raped by soderling and then spread his butt open for delpo. now i know why all the butt picking.

Purostaff
09-14-2009, 12:47 PM
wow strong fail logic

namelessone
09-14-2009, 12:48 PM
nadal is clearly better because he's the only one that can get raped by soderling and then spread his butt open for delpo. now i know why all the butt picking.

Go back to MTF troll.

DonBudge
10-10-2009, 05:25 AM
ArrowSmith banned and.. FAILLLLLLLL

tenniskid567
10-10-2009, 10:22 PM
Then shouldn't fact of the matter be that if Roger is the GOAT then he should be capable of mastering all surfaces? Seriously, if anyone is the Greatest of all time, then clay and one player should not be such an issue for you.

For real? Roger has clay down, just not Nadal on clay. The only reason he has a losing record to Nadal on clay is because HE MAKES IT TO THE FINAL EVERY TIME. Maybe if Nadal could actually make it to the USO final ONCE against Fed, and maybe a few more Wimbledons...if Nadal made it to USO against Fed as many times as Fed made it to French against Nadal....whole differend head to head story. Really though....Federer is arguably the second best clay courter out there right now. Just because the only guy you lose to on clay is the best clay courter in the game today, doesn't mean you haven't "mastered" the surface.

bojsag
10-10-2009, 10:31 PM
For real? Roger has clay down, just not Nadal on clay. The only reason he has a losing record to Nadal on clay is because HE MAKES IT TO THE FINAL EVERY TIME. Maybe if Nadal could actually make it to the USO final ONCE against Fed, and maybe a few more Wimbledons...if Nadal made it to USO against Fed as many times as Fed made it to French against Nadal....whole differend head to head story. Really though....Federer is arguably the second best clay courter out there right now. Just because the only guy you lose to on clay is the best clay courter in the game today, doesn't mean you haven't "mastered" the surface.

Oh really, what an interesting theory. BTW last two slam final meetings between Nadal and Federer were on grass and HC. Guess who won both. There goes your nice little "nonclay" theory.

ubermeyer
10-10-2009, 10:33 PM
post #22 - funny troll

Nadal is ahead of Fed, true. As they say though, let's see how his knees do... no?

vndesu
10-10-2009, 10:35 PM
i would put my money on age difference mhmmm

Agassifan
10-10-2009, 11:02 PM
IQ of some of the posters on this thread = single digits.

sh@de
10-11-2009, 01:26 AM
IQ of some of the posters on this thread = single digits.

You sure they're not negative?

Jason Vorhees
10-11-2009, 03:42 AM
You sure they're not negative?

Not even people in 'DENSA' have a negative IQ.


BTW Federer is superior to Nadal, H2H doesn't really matter because it's probably a tough matchup. If we are comparing attributes then the only thing nadal has that federer doesn't have is a 2HBH (+ bicep muscle). This is comming from someone who dispises Federer, but threads like these are pointless because 15 GS's triumphs 6.

The fact is the federer was clearly out of sorts and out of his prime and still actually challeneged nadal (even on clay this year). If we take prime Federer (06 ish) and stick him with 08 nadal then Federer will come out on top on every surface but clay.

No need to compare attributes because Federer is superior at the moment (even out of his prime) than nadal except for the backhand and fitness.

As i said, I hate federer, but i also dislike nadal too.

wyutani
10-11-2009, 04:03 AM
explain to me why the OP was banned? lol.

Jason Vorhees
10-11-2009, 04:04 AM
The OP was banned for acting like a spanner-monkey