PDA

View Full Version : If Nadal...


Nadalfan89
01-17-2011, 07:05 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

kishnabe
01-17-2011, 07:10 PM
Delete this thread before things get ugly! Especially when Nadal fails to win!

The-Champ
01-17-2011, 07:12 PM
If he can make Federer cry for the second time, then we can consider his candidacy. Once is a fluke ;)

edman9898
01-17-2011, 07:12 PM
Clay, grass, hard court. What's the fourth surface?

Semi-Pro
01-17-2011, 07:14 PM
If Nadal...

Was your daddy, would you let him spank you?

rommil
01-17-2011, 07:15 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

Andre Agassi called........ He's going to enrol you free in his school.

Legend of Borg
01-17-2011, 07:19 PM
Rafa pulled off the grueling bagel today.

Surely he's already GOAT for defeating swiftly moving and dangerous Daniel?

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 07:31 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

Definitely, it sets him up perfectly. He'll also very likely win 8 or more Roland Garros titles which puts him ahead of Sampras' 7 Wimbledons. And then there's the 18 Masters Shields record which will probably become about 30.

danielrios
01-17-2011, 07:32 PM
wasnt he the goat already??????? man,

If you call dominance 2 HC slams... Federer has 9 man, that's dominance. And 6 on grass.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 07:33 PM
wasnt he the goat already??????? man,

If you call dominance 2 HC slams... Federer has 9 man, that's dominance. And 6 on grass.

But Federer only has one slam on clay, even at age 30!

Messarger
01-17-2011, 07:35 PM
Clay, grass, hard court. What's the fourth surface?

actually it's only one surface. red clay, green clay, deco turf clay, and the blue clay at the AO.

Carolina Racquet
01-17-2011, 07:36 PM
Clay, grass, hard court. What's the fourth surface?

Water... all that flooding in Australia... See below...

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/50648000/jpg/_50648207_watertennis_afp.jpg

OrangePower
01-17-2011, 07:39 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

IF he wins the AO, he will have had one of the most amazing 12 months in tennis history. However, GOAT is based on an entire career, not just 1 year. When his career is over, then we will be able to compare it to others. At this point, if he wins AO but then never picks up a racquet again, no, he is not yet GOAT.

danielrios
01-17-2011, 07:48 PM
But Federer only has one slam on clay, even at age 30!

So???? Nadal is the best current claycourter, but:

Grass and HC: 2
Clay: 1

2 > 1

Understand????

Manus Domini
01-17-2011, 07:49 PM
Err, four remarkably similar surfaces, that are barely different.

He's not GOAT. Have him play a clay court tourney and win that then play on indoor wood and win that a few times in a row and tell me he's better than that.

Sorry, Nadal isn't GOAT yet...

Btw, the real GOAT era contest is between Kod Roser and Rogael Fedal

drakulie
01-17-2011, 07:53 PM
Thoughts?


http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x89/edwardbayntun/gifs/SavingPrivateRyan2.gif

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 07:55 PM
So???? Nadal is the best current claycourter, but:

Grass and HC: 2
Clay: 1

2 > 1

Understand????

LOL he's 24 and only just begun his prime on hardcourts.....while the other guy is 30 and very unlikely to win another clay slam. Rafa will win between 5 and 10 hardcourt slams most likely.

danielrios
01-17-2011, 08:05 PM
LOL he's 24 and only just begun his prime on hardcourts.....while the other guy is 30 and very unlikely to win another clay slam. Rafa will win between 5 and 10 hardcourt slams most likely.


5 to 10??? HAHAHA are you kidding me??? USO was all about fluke and easy draws. After trying and trying it must happen anytime.

And yeah, he's 24 but his knees are 50.

coloskier
01-17-2011, 08:08 PM
Clay, grass, hard court. What's the fourth surface?

Well, it certainly isn't indoor fast hard court.

Nadalfan89
01-17-2011, 08:08 PM
Lol, whenever Nadal loses because his knees are messed up, *******s claim that he's making excuses. Then whenever someone says Nadal will win many majors, *******s claim his knees are messed up.

Such creative logic!

Messarger
01-17-2011, 08:12 PM
Lol, whenever Nadal loses because his knees are messed up, *******s claim that he's making excuses. Then whenever someone says Nadal will win many majors, *******s claim his knees are messed up.

Such creative logic!

you are winner for posting that.

billnepill
01-17-2011, 08:13 PM
okay, you are right. He is the GOAT

you are dealing with kids around 11-12 years old, agree with them, cause they get easily upset.Thanks.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:21 PM
5 to 10??? HAHAHA are you kidding me??? USO was all about fluke and easy draws. After trying and trying it must happen anytime.

And yeah, he's 24 but his knees are 50.

A bunch of Wimbledons too.

He hasn't even had a knee surgery, silly. He's only got tendonitis, and his new doctor in 2010 treated each knee (one early in the year and the other just after Wimbledon) and neither knee has had tendonitis flareups since. His doctor is the pioneer of blood-spinning treatment. Sorry.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:21 PM
Lol, whenever Nadal loses because his knees are messed up, *******s claim that he's making excuses. Then whenever someone says Nadal will win many majors, *******s claim his knees are messed up.

Such creative logic!

LOL, very funny people.

John_Doe
01-17-2011, 08:31 PM
A bunch of Wimbledons too.

He hasn't even had a knee surgery, silly. He's only got tendonitis, and his new doctor in 2010 treated each knee (one early in the year and the other just after Wimbledon) and neither knee has had tendonitis flareups since. His doctor is the pioneer of blood-spinning treatment. Sorry.

Sorry, but as a physician, I must say that this "blood-spinning" therapy is just a fad. Its merely an alternative route that fed up athletes take when conventional therapy (physical therapy, rest, ice, compression, pain medications, surgery) fails, and understandably so. If I had tendonitis that were refractory to conventional therapy, I too would be willing to try something new, however, all the data published thus far shows that it is no more beneficial than placebo therapy and certainly not any better than traditional therapy.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:33 PM
Sorry, but as a physician, I must say that this "blood-spinning" therapy is just a fad. Its merely an alternative route that fed up athletes take when conventional therapy (physical therapy, rest, ice, compression, pain medications, surgery) fails, and understandably so. If I had tendonitis that were refractory to conventional therapy, I too would be willing to try something new, however, all the data published thus far shows that it is no more beneficial than placebo therapy and certainly not any better than traditional therapy.

Not according to the Rafa camp. And they have the know-how in their corner beyond anyone else in this area. I read that his treatment takes 4 days and his knee is immediately 100% after those 4 days. Also he was receiving blood-spinning treatment in 2008-09 but from a different doctor with a different way of applying it. It never worked and the new doctor pointed out the faults in the 2008-09 doctor's method, and took over.

John_Doe
01-17-2011, 08:39 PM
Not according to the Rafa camp. And they have the know-how in their corner beyond anyone else in this area. I read that his treatment takes 4 days and his knee is immediately 100% after those 4 days. Also he was receiving blood-spinning treatment in 2008-09 but from a different doctor with a different way of applying it. It never worked and the new doctor pointed out the faults in the 2008-09 doctor's method, and took over.

You can choose to believe that such a miracle therapy exists, I was just giving my professional opinion based on the studies out there, which are very sound scientifically and show no benefit.

John_Doe
01-17-2011, 08:41 PM
Not according to the Rafa camp. And they have the know-how in their corner beyond anyone else in this area. I read that his treatment takes 4 days and his knee is immediately 100% after those 4 days. Also he was receiving blood-spinning treatment in 2008-09 but from a different doctor with a different way of applying it. It never worked and the new doctor pointed out the faults in the 2008-09 doctor's method, and took over.

That makes absolutely no sense at all. The theory behind "blood spinning" therapy is long term healing, not immediate relief. Its not a steroid or lidocaine shot, its an infusion of platelets, which are thought to contain cytokines that promote tissue growth and healing in the long term.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:43 PM
That makes absolutely no sense at all. The theory behind "blood spinning" therapy is long term healing, not immediate relief. Its not a steroid or lidocaine shot, its an infusion of platelets, which are thought to contain cytokines that promote tissue growth and healing in the long term.

Well if you talk to Rafa's doctor I'm sure you can learn a lot, since he is the most well known doctor in this area.

http://gototennis.com/2010/09/25/rafael-nadal-knee-update-his-doctors-spin-on-prp-therapy/


Rafael Nadal’s chronic knee tendinitis seems like old news – these days we’re busy talking about the three Majors he won this year, his career slam and his imminent ascent to GOAThood (just ask Pete Sampras.) But remember that during this very same season Rafa retired in the quarters of the Australian Open because of knee issues and was in visible distress during a match just six months ago at Indian Wells (click here.)

So what’s the secret to this fantastic turnaround? Rafa reportedly underwent a new treatment to his left knee after winning Monte Carlo in late April. After some issues at this year’s Wimbledon, he treated his right knee in the same manner, “to improve the regeneration of the tendon,” Spanish tennis federation doctor Angel Ruiz Cotorro explained. Nadal told reporters that the treatment was too complicated for him to explain in English.

An interview with Rafael Nadal’s knee doctor, Mikel Sánchez was posted on Friday on Spanish sports site Marca.com. (Thanks to FeddyBear for the link!) In it, Dr. Sánchez describes this seemingly miraculous regenerative treatment, which is known as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy.

rommil
01-17-2011, 08:49 PM
Not according to the Rafa camp. And they have the know-how in their corner beyond anyone else in this area. I read that his treatment takes 4 days and his knee is immediately 100% after those 4 days. Also he was receiving blood-spinning treatment in 2008-09 but from a different doctor with a different way of applying it. It never worked and the new doctor pointed out the faults in the 2008-09 doctor's method, and took over.

The only spinning the Nadal camp does are the stories and excuses they come up with every time he suffers a devastating loss.

John_Doe
01-17-2011, 08:52 PM
Well if you talk to Rafa's doctor I'm sure you can learn a lot, since he is the most well known doctor in this area.

http://gototennis.com/2010/09/25/rafael-nadal-knee-update-his-doctors-spin-on-prp-therapy/

Yes I have read that same exact article and many others after some patients of mine expressed interest in the treatment. Don't believe what his doctors are telling you, it is not a miraculous one or two day treatment. It takes weeks to months to take effect and even then the results are marginal at best.

Read the Scientific American article that is linked in that gototennis link, it sheds some light on the theory behind the practice. Since then, every clinical trial, including many double blinded placebo trials, have proven its use as not benefical. Don't fall for the propaganda from the Nadal camp about his "miracle cure." His knees are getting better with steroid shots into the joint space, physical training, and periods of rest, nothing more.

Messarger
01-17-2011, 08:53 PM
The only spinning the Nadal camp does are the stories and excuses they come up with every time he suffers a devastating loss.

The only spinning the Nadal forehand does are the crosscourts and down the lines it come up with every time he suffers a deciding break point.

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:53 PM
The only spinning the Nadal camp does are the stories and excuses they come up with every time he suffers a devastating loss.

If you're talking about the Del Potro loss, he had a torn stomach muscle which he acquired before the 2009 US Open, and was hitting the 1st serve at only 106mph. Even running is difficult with that type of injury. 15mm torn muscle according to his doctor.

Soderling Roland Garros loss was foreseeable, he'd been moving a step slow during all the clay events that year even when he was winning. He told in the Spanish TV interview in June 09 that he'd been taking pain-killers before every match in the clay season. That was actually a result of the late 2008 tendonitis which he old doctor couldn't help and it got worse during the 2009 AO which he won.

TBrady
01-17-2011, 08:55 PM
If Ralph would just disappear it would be great for us real tennis fans.

Then he could cheat, intimidate and pick somewhere else.

John_Doe
01-17-2011, 08:57 PM
If Ralph would just disappear it would be great.

Just out of curiosity, since when did everyone start calling him Ralph and for what reason?

nadal_slam_king
01-17-2011, 08:59 PM
http://masalapix.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/joannamartakrupa-feb2009ralph-01.jpg
Because he can get girls that you see on Ralph Magazine.

luvly
01-17-2011, 09:03 PM
If Ralph would just disappear it would be great.


While I am far from a nadal fan I have to protest your statement in light of your comment in the "injury" it is truly unhealthy to harbor such ill feelings toward someone you do not know if you find that these feelings are recurrent towards several people you do not know, you should seek help.....

MichaelNadal
01-17-2011, 09:15 PM
Just out of curiosity, since when did everyone start calling him Ralph and for what reason?

The funny thing is it's not even an insult. One person thought it was funny and the others are too unoriginal to come up with something else.

Sid_Vicious
01-17-2011, 09:16 PM
The funny thing is it's not even an insult. One person thought it was funny and the others are too unoriginal to come up with something else.
Ralph just rolls of the tongue

Sid_Vicious
01-17-2011, 09:18 PM
http://masalapix.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/joannamartakrupa-feb2009ralph-01.jpg
Because he can get girls that you see on Ralph Magazine.
"Ralph's sexiest sisters"?

-Nadal is into incestuous relations and likes to eat kebab's nude?

TBrady
01-17-2011, 09:19 PM
The funny thing is it's not even an insult. One person thought it was funny and the others are too unoriginal to come up with something else.

The shoe fits. Its a funny perjorative term for a lying cheater.

I have dozens of names for that guy that probably shouldn't be posted haha.

MichaelNadal
01-17-2011, 09:26 PM
The shoe fits. Its a funny perjorative term for a lying cheater.

I have dozens of names for that guy that probably shouldn't be posted haha.

Lol, well A. any Rafa fan really isn't going to care regardless, and B. Rafa's racquet will continue to do the talking. So by your lead Mr. Turner.

Sid_Vicious
01-17-2011, 09:29 PM
Lol, well A. any Rafa fan really isn't going to care regardless, and B. Rafa's racquet will continue to do the talking. So by your lead Mr. Turner.
I just call him Ralph for the heck of it. I like the guy. Don't think he is a cheater or anything.

drakulie
01-17-2011, 09:29 PM
Well if you talk to Rafa's doctor I'm sure you can learn a lot,


I'm sure nadal can too, considering he ignored their advice twice in 2009, and continued to play even though they continued to state he needed 3-4 weeks rest to let the inflamation go down, diagnose, and treat.

Guess he just wasn't injured and they were full of it.

TBrady
01-17-2011, 09:31 PM
Lol, well A. any Rafa fan really isn't going to care regardless, and B. Rafa's racquet will continue to do the talking. So by your lead Mr. Turner.

I know they will continue to exist in the in***** of Rafas colon. Clean living!

MichaelNadal
01-17-2011, 09:35 PM
I just call him Ralph for the heck of it. I like the guy. Don't think he is a cheater or anything.

Yeah it's pretty funny IMO. I call him Rafito most of the time.

I know they will continue to exist in the in***** of Rafas colon. Clean living!

It's amazing how anyone can troll someone that has done so much for the sport of tennis. I always root for Nadal when he plays Fed, but otherwise, I have nothing but respect for Federer.

TBrady
01-17-2011, 09:39 PM
Oh yeah lying, cheating, intimidating, faking injuries, picking wedgies, phony character do a ton for the sport.

What an inspiration!

MichaelNadal
01-17-2011, 09:42 PM
Oh yeah lying, cheating, intimidating, faking injuries, picking wedgies, phony character do a ton for the sport.

What an inspiration!

http://michaeljacksonanimatedgifs.com/images/others/mjgifs19.gif

BreakPoint
01-17-2011, 11:43 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?
Get back to us when Nadal makes it to 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals.

cc0509
01-17-2011, 11:57 PM
Get back to us when Nadal makes it to 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals.

Or when Nadal has won 16 grand slams!

Bud
01-17-2011, 11:58 PM
Lol, whenever Nadal loses because his knees are messed up, *******s claim that he's making excuses. Then whenever someone says Nadal will win many majors, *******s claim his knees are messed up.

Such creative logic!

That is humorous :)

Bud
01-17-2011, 11:58 PM
Get back to us when Nadal makes it to 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals.

Nobody cares about SF appearances

cc0509
01-17-2011, 11:59 PM
Nobody cares about SF appearances

But they do care about total grand slam wins.

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 01:28 AM
Nobody cares about SF appearances
No, *********s don't care about SF appearances because Nadal is MIA in most of them. :oops:

*********s also don't care about GS final appearances because Nadal has only made 11 finals while Federer has made 22 finals. That's twice as many. :oops:

Oh, and only *********s care about H2H when no one else does. :???:

nadal_slam_king
01-18-2011, 02:03 AM
No, *********s don't care about SF appearances because Nadal is MIA in most of them. :oops:

*********s also don't care about GS final appearances because Nadal has only made 11 finals while Federer has made 22 finals. That's twice as many. :oops:

Oh, and only *********s care about H2H when no one else does. :???:

ummm Federer is about 5 years older than Nadal.

Who cares about Finals appearances when you need a 5 year head-start lol. Conversion rate is the key anyway, and Rafa sure has that.

Hitman
01-18-2011, 02:06 AM
"Ralph's sexiest sisters"?

-Nadal is into incestuous relations and likes to eat kebab's nude?

LMAO!!!!!!!!! :)

aphex
01-18-2011, 02:08 AM
Because he can get girls that you see on Ralph Magazine.

"Ralph's sexiest sisters"?

-Nadal is into incestuous relations and likes to eat kebab's nude?

http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/backfire-plan-failed.jpg

Welsh Wizard
01-18-2011, 04:49 AM
I have never commented on these kind of posts before as I generally can't quite believe Nadal fans' arraogance and sheer pig headedness and quickly flick to another thread dismissing them as jealous children. However, this is just getting ridiculous.

Seriously, How old are these Nad-***** on average? 10? 11? Younger? Any older and I'd begin to wonder about how far you're going to get in life with all this pent up rage and incessant need to belittle Federer's achievements. Get a life guys. Tennis is not a one man sport.

The fact of the matter is we are currently witnessing something never seen before in the world of tennis. Two completely dominant players who have won all but two of the last 7-8 years worth of grand slams. Right now, Federer is unarguably the greatest as he has won 16 slams - this is the ONLY way people remember how great someone is. I have no idea how many masters he has won and quite simply don't care. No-one says how many Laver won (and I know they weren't around then!). Any other way of comparing achievements is just pointless. 16 (across all surfaces) is all history will remember.

Nadal may get there, but he still as 7 to go to just level Fed. That's by no means a given as there is Fed to play against, as well as Murray, Djoker and any of the top 10 who also have a serious shout of winning a slam.

Seriously guys, chill out a little, take a step back and look at it objectively. Due to Fed and now Nadal aswell, tennis is arguably as popular as it has ever been. We need both of them. If Fed kept winning everything it would become boring, despite his game being easy on the eye. If Nadal kept winning people would get turned off by his bruising style.

I for one, would love to see Murray win one. God knows he couldn't have got any closer than he already has done!

Bobby Jr
01-18-2011, 05:26 AM
...His doctor is the pioneer of blood-spinning treatment. Sorry.
You can't help yourself can you? It's like some mantra to mention this in every 3rd post you make.

...I read that his treatment takes 4 days and his knee is immediately 100% after those 4 days.
This proves (yet again) what a partisan hack you are. Every sports doctor and sports person who's been injured on the planet would be laughing at you right now if they read that. Please show us where this was written by anyone with any level of credibility.

Seriously. How on earth does this stuff enter your head and make enough sense that you actually think people wont simply laugh at you when you type it as fact?

I'm actually picturing you at your keyboard with a poster of the inventor of blood spinning on the wall next to you which you reach out an touch every so often to remind yourself of his greatness.

amaze
01-18-2011, 05:37 AM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?
Your signature says "13/09/10 <--- The day Nadal became the GOAT. "
Yet you ask us whether this AO will make him the GOAT...
Aren't you finding yourself a bit confused?:cry:

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 08:18 AM
Your signature says "13/09/10 <--- The day Nadal became the GOAT. "
Yet you ask us whether this AO will make him the GOAT...
Aren't you finding yourself a bit confused?:cry:

Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:20 AM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

I see, so these are the same chumps that prevented Nadal from getting to more slam finals from 2005-2007?

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 08:26 AM
I see, so these are the same chumps that prevented Nadal from getting to more slam finals from 2005-2007?

Yes, they prevented a 19 year old clay courter from making more slam finals. Now that Nadal is at his peak, those chumps are getting destroyed. Federer faced those people in his prime.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:27 AM
Yes, they prevented a 19 year old clay courter from making more slam finals. Now that Nadal is at his peak, those chumps are getting destroyed. Federer faced those people in his prime.

Yeah a 19 year old who had already won a slam. A lot more than those chumps combined! Yet those chumps somehow foiled any further slams in those years.

dandelion_smiley
01-18-2011, 08:33 AM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

Nadal can't even beat one of those "chumps" in Davydenko who Federer beat 12 times in a row in his prime. Nadal is also known for his perfect records against such chumps as Hewitt, Roddick and Nalbandian

Nadal is a demolishing 18-15 against Hewitt, Roddick, Davydenko, Nalbandian combined

CMM
01-18-2011, 10:46 AM
I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1094/snlno.gif

Rippy
01-18-2011, 11:05 AM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

So Nadal won most of his majors against an overrated chump who won most of his majors against chumps?

http://www.seoboy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/implied-facepalm.jpg

aphex
01-18-2011, 11:23 AM
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1094/snlno.gif

A sane Nadal fan? Unheard of!

TBrady
01-18-2011, 11:37 AM
Haha so true dude.

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 03:13 PM
ummm Federer is about 5 years older than Nadal.

Who cares about Finals appearances when you need a 5 year head-start lol. Conversion rate is the key anyway, and Rafa sure has that.
Wrong! Nadal turned pro only 3 years after Federer did.

Speranza
01-18-2011, 03:26 PM
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/1094/snlno.gif

Watson: Great gif :)

A sane Nadal fan? Unheard of!

Holmes: Now now Aphex, just as some (not all) Roger fans are sane, some Ralph ones are also!

Speranza
01-18-2011, 03:31 PM
I have never commented on these kind of posts before as I generally can't quite believe Nadal fans' arraogance and sheer pig headedness and quickly flick to another thread dismissing them as jealous children. However, this is just getting ridiculous.

Seriously, How old are these Nad-***** on average? 10? 11? Younger? Any older and I'd begin to wonder about how far you're going to get in life with all this pent up rage and incessant need to belittle Federer's achievements. Get a life guys. Tennis is not a one man sport.

The fact of the matter is we are currently witnessing something never seen before in the world of tennis. Two completely dominant players who have won all but two of the last 7-8 years worth of grand slams. Right now, Federer is unarguably the greatest as he has won 16 slams - this is the ONLY way people remember how great someone is. I have no idea how many masters he has won and quite simply don't care. No-one says how many Laver won (and I know they weren't around then!). Any other way of comparing achievements is just pointless. 16 (across all surfaces) is all history will remember.

Nadal may get there, but he still as 7 to go to just level Fed. That's by no means a given as there is Fed to play against, as well as Murray, Djoker and any of the top 10 who also have a serious shout of winning a slam.

Seriously guys, chill out a little, take a step back and look at it objectively. Due to Fed and now Nadal aswell, tennis is arguably as popular as it has ever been. We need both of them. If Fed kept winning everything it would become boring, despite his game being easy on the eye. If Nadal kept winning people would get turned off by his bruising style.

I for one, would love to see Murray win one. God knows he couldn't have got any closer than he already has done!

Holmes: This is already the best post I have read in the last several months.

PS I do think the bolded part explains part of the problem here.

flyinghippos101
01-18-2011, 04:13 PM
nadal_slam_king now arguing with a physician based on some articles? Wow, you'll go to some serious lengths to defend Raf...

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 04:26 PM
nadal_slam_king now arguing with a physician based on some articles? Wow, you'll go to some serious lengths to defend Raf...

I'm a physician too. See how easy it is to be whatever you want to be on the internet?

JeMar
01-18-2011, 04:31 PM
I have never commented on these kind of posts before as I generally can't quite believe Nadal fans' arraogance and sheer pig headedness and quickly flick to another thread dismissing them as jealous children. However, this is just getting ridiculous.

Seriously, How old are these Nad-***** on average? 10? 11? Younger? Any older and I'd begin to wonder about how far you're going to get in life with all this pent up rage and incessant need to belittle Federer's achievements. Get a life guys. Tennis is not a one man sport.

The fact of the matter is we are currently witnessing something never seen before in the world of tennis. Two completely dominant players who have won all but two of the last 7-8 years worth of grand slams. Right now, Federer is unarguably the greatest as he has won 16 slams - this is the ONLY way people remember how great someone is. I have no idea how many masters he has won and quite simply don't care. No-one says how many Laver won (and I know they weren't around then!). Any other way of comparing achievements is just pointless. 16 (across all surfaces) is all history will remember.

Nadal may get there, but he still as 7 to go to just level Fed. That's by no means a given as there is Fed to play against, as well as Murray, Djoker and any of the top 10 who also have a serious shout of winning a slam.

Seriously guys, chill out a little, take a step back and look at it objectively. Due to Fed and now Nadal aswell, tennis is arguably as popular as it has ever been. We need both of them. If Fed kept winning everything it would become boring, despite his game being easy on the eye. If Nadal kept winning people would get turned off by his bruising style.

I for one, would love to see Murray win one. God knows he couldn't have got any closer than he already has done!

He could've won a set in a slam final, ooooooh.


Sorry, I loved your post, but I just had to. :(

The-Champ
01-18-2011, 04:54 PM
I have never commented on these kind of posts before as I generally can't quite believe Nadal fans' arraogance and sheer pig headedness and quickly flick to another thread dismissing them as jealous children. However, this is just getting ridiculous.

Seriously, How old are these Nad-***** on average? 10? 11? Younger? Any older and I'd begin to wonder about how far you're going to get in life with all this pent up rage and incessant need to belittle Federer's achievements. Get a life guys. Tennis is not a one man sport.


The fact of the matter is we are currently witnessing something never seen before in the world of tennis. Two completely dominant players who have won all but two of the last 7-8 years worth of grand slams. Right now, Federer is unarguably the greatest as he has won 16 slams - this is the ONLY way people remember how great someone is. I have no idea how many masters he has won and quite simply don't care. No-one says how many Laver won (and I know they weren't around then!). Any other way of comparing achievements is just pointless. 16 (across all surfaces) is all history will remember.

Nadal may get there, but he still as 7 to go to just level Fed. That's by no means a given as there is Fed to play against, as well as Murray, Djoker and any of the top 10 who also have a serious shout of winning a slam.

Seriously guys, chill out a little, take a step back and look at it objectively. Due to Fed and now Nadal aswell, tennis is arguably as popular as it has ever been. We need both of them. If Fed kept winning everything it would become boring, despite his game being easy on the eye. If Nadal kept winning people would get turned off by his bruising style.

I for one, would love to see Murray win one. God knows he couldn't have got any closer than he already has done!


If you want to be the ambassador of "good posting", at least try not to be biased. If Nadal-***** are 10-11 year-olds, at least they are acting their age. Fed-***** however are probably on average above 30, but act as if they were 6, by constantly reminding everyone Federer is the GOAT and that former greats are sh1t in comparison.


I agree on Murray. I hope he wins his first slam this year.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 04:55 PM
No, *********s don't care about SF appearances because Nadal is MIA in most of them. :oops:

*********s also don't care about GS final appearances because Nadal has only made 11 finals while Federer has made 22 finals. That's twice as many. :oops:

Oh, and only *********s care about H2H when no one else does. :???:

Bold 1) How can he be MIA? 2 SF at AO, 5 at FO, 4 at Wim and 3 at USO. How many GS SF's did Fed make it to at age 24?

Bold 2) How many slam finals did Fed make it to when he was 24? It's easy for you to compare Fed's achievements when he is 5 years older and therefore had more opportunies to reach those finals.

3) You don't care about h2h because Rafa owns him in that department, he couldn't even beat him on his favorite surface when it mattered most, he ended up crying in front of everyone. He must've learnt from his fellow countrywoman in Hingis didn't he?

ledwix
01-18-2011, 04:58 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

It's safe to say that 10 slams is incredibly weak for a GOAT. This is bandwagon bull.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 04:58 PM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.
http://www.citizenx.cx/img/amusing/animations/ascii/M4PL0L.gif

Semi-Pro
01-18-2011, 05:00 PM
http://www.citizenx.cx/img/amusing/animations/ascii/M4PL0L.gif

You sir, are the new god of GIFs! LOL!

ledwix
01-18-2011, 05:07 PM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

So is Federer good or not for beating those chumps? If they were just chumps, and Federer didn't earn those slams, then Nadal didn't earn his slams either, because he only had to play the easy chump Federer who only got all his glory by playing other chumps. This logic is ********. Federer and Nadal are obviously both amazing tennis players and some of the greatest ever to pick up a racquet.

The only way to solve this situation is to look at it objectively without all the nonsensical ******ation involved in it; that is, that EVERY grand slam is a title that is earned, because every grand slam requires you to be at the top of your game for two entire weeks, with no slip-ups. Trying to take away from Federer's 16 due to diverse final opponents or add to Nadal's 9 due to homogeneous final opponents is absurd.

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 05:17 PM
So is Federer good or not for beating those chumps? If they were just chumps, and Federer didn't earn those slams, then Nadal didn't earn his slams either, because he only had to play the easy chump Federer who only got all his glory by playing other chumps. This logic is ********. Federer and Nadal are obviously both amazing tennis players and some of the greatest ever to pick up a racquet.

The only way to solve this situation is to look at it objectively without all the nonsensical ******ation involved in it; that is, that EVERY grand slam is a title that is earned, because every grand slam requires you to be at the top of your game for two entire weeks, with no slip-ups. Trying to take away from Federer's 16 due to diverse final opponents or add to Nadal's 9 due to homogeneous final opponents is absurd.

Alright, fine. Phillipousis, Gonzalez, Baghdadis, Roddick and Hewitt are formidable opponents.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 05:19 PM
Alright, fine. Phillipousis, Gonzalez, Baghdadis, Roddick and Hewitt are formidable opponents.

Surely you can see your logic fail?

If Federer just beat "chumps" (your words), then how is it in any way impressive that Nadal beat Federer for so many of his slams?

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 05:23 PM
Surely you can see your logic fail?

If Federer just beat "chumps" (your words), then how is it in any way impressive that Nadal beat Federer for so many of his slams?

Federer still beat those idiots, which means Federer is better than them. Therefore, Nadal beat a guy who was better than all those people.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:23 PM
Surely you can see your logic fail?

If Federer just beat "chumps" (your words), then how is it in any way impressive that Nadal beat Federer for so many of his slams?
Nadal's last three grand slams have been against competitive players like Soderling, Berdych, and Djokovic. Those guy's never looked defeated at all. They fought until the last point. :lol:

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:24 PM
Federer still beat those idiots, which means Federer is better than them. Therefore, Nadal beat a guy who was better than all those people.
When making an argument, at least come up with some sensical premises. LOL!

Rippy
01-18-2011, 05:33 PM
Federer still beat those idiots, which means Federer is better than them. Therefore, Nadal beat a guy who was better than all those people.

Right, so Nadal is better than a "chump-beater".

Wow.

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 05:35 PM
Right, so Nadal is better than a "chump-beater".

Wow.

Exactly. Federer steam rolled through a bunch of ******s to win his slams. Nadal had to at least slay the guy who slayed ******s, making his grand slams more legit.

phnx90
01-18-2011, 05:38 PM
I'm a Rafa fan, but even I think that the OP is jumping to conclusions here. I honestly don't see how winning the AO will make him the indisputable GOAT.

...and *******s can lay off with the insults. If there is anything that we can pretty much all agree on, it's that:

a) Fed is at the moment the GOAT; but
b) Rafa is already up there somewhere, or at the very least well on his way

Fed has gotten to a point where even if he drops dead tomorrow, he'll still be topping the list. If Rafa drops dead tomorrow, he'll be nowhere near the top of that list. That said, he may well beat Fed if, and only if he follows our extrapolations. That means that there must not be a new player he will have difficulty beating (as Rafa is to Fed atm), and that his knees won't go kaputt on him (which has already happened once). Arguing that Rafa is better than Fed because of his winning record is a flawed argument; Kolya has a winning record against Rafa, but I don't see anyone arguing that he is better than Rafa, for example.

Where does that leave you? Nowhere; it's all speculation. At least *******s have got 16 GS, 17 Masters 1000, and 5 WTFs to cite; even with Nadal having more Masters 1000s titles under his belt, he's got to at least rival Fed's number of GS before you can even think about concluding Nadal as GOAT.

No reasonable human being is denying that Nadal is definitely one of the greatest players of all time; what I'm saying is that calling him the GOAT is just uncalled for. It's just too soon.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 05:38 PM
Exactly. Federer steam rolled through a bunch of ******s to win his slams. Nadal had to at least slay the guy who slayed ******s, making his grand slams more legit.

In other words you essentially contradict yourself. Nadal beat a guy who beats chumps. And that's his claim to the GOAT??? LOLLLLLLLLLLLL. What a loser you are.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 05:40 PM
I'm a Rafa fan, but even I think that the OP is jumping to conclusions here. I honestly don't see how winning the AO will make him the indisputable GOAT.

...and *******s can lay off with the insults. If there is anything that we can pretty much all agree on, it's that:

a) Fed is at the moment the GOAT; but
b) Rafa is already up there somewhere, or at the very least well on his way

Fed has gotten to a point where even if he drops dead tomorrow, he'll still be topping the list. If Rafa drops dead tomorrow, he'll be nowhere near the top of that list. That said, he may well beat Fed if, and only if he follows our extrapolations. That means that there must not be a new player he will have difficulty beating (as Rafa is to Fed atm), and that his knees won't go kaputt on him (which has already happened once). Arguing that Rafa is better than Fed because of his winning record is a flawed argument; Kolya has a winning record against Rafa, but I don't see anyone arguing that he is better than Rafa, for example.

Where does that leave you? Nowhere; it's all speculation. At least *******s have got 16 GS, 17 Masters 1000, and 5 WTFs to cite; even with Nadal having more Masters 1000s titles under his belt, he's got to at least rival Fed's number of GS before you can even think about concluding Nadal as GOAT.

No reasonable human being is denying that Nadal is definitely one of the greatest players of all time; what I'm saying is that calling him the GOAT is just uncalled for. It's just too soon.

Wow! A sensible Nadal fan. I'm shocked :shock: Now I've seen it all.

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 05:40 PM
In other words you essentially contradict yourself. Nadal beat a guy who beats chumps. And that's his claim to the GOAT??? LOLLLLLLLLLLLL. What a loser you are.

So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.

samurai13
01-18-2011, 05:42 PM
Me Gusta Esto Thread

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 05:42 PM
So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.

You have no credible evidence that it was a joke era. It's just your idiotic opinion. So Nadal smacked around a guy who beat joke era guys? And that makes him GOAT? What about Borg? Laver? Sampras? Did those guys play in a joke era too? Get a clue idiot.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 05:43 PM
Exactly. Federer steam rolled through a bunch of ******s to win his slams. Nadal had to at least slay the guy who slayed ******s, making his grand slams more legit.

OK, but then why on earth would you think Nadal is the GOAT? (Which you say in your sig.)

How does beating a chump who beat chumps make you the GOAT? It just makes him better than a chump-beater.

tudwell
01-18-2011, 05:44 PM
Alright, fine. Phillipousis, Gonzalez, Baghdadis, Roddick and Hewitt are formidable opponents.

In what universe are Roddick or Hewitt not formidable opponents? They're both former number ones and grand slam winners, which is more than we can say for Djokovic or Murray, some of Nadal's prime competition.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:45 PM
In what universe are Roddick or Hewitt not formidable opponents? They're both former number ones and grand slam winners, which is more than we can say for Djokovic or Murray, some of Nadal's prime competition.
Don't forget champs like Soderling and Berdych.

phnx90
01-18-2011, 05:54 PM
Wow! A sensible Nadal fan. I'm shocked :shock: Now I've seen it all.

Why thank you. I have to admit, *******s are just the worst kind of -*****. The only things that are worse are console-***** (PS3/Xbox) and macf*gs. I think I'll add COD noobs and anyone who puts 009 Sound System songs to their youtube videos on that list :P

phnx90
01-18-2011, 05:56 PM
Oh, I already believe without a doubt that he's the GOAT. I think if he wins the AO, he will be the indisputable GOAT. Federer won most of his majors against complete chumps, whereas Nadal won most of his majors against Federer. Nadal is obviously better.

...and Davydenko has a winning record against Nadal. Therefore Kolya is GOAT?

cc0509
01-18-2011, 06:03 PM
I'm a Rafa fan, but even I think that the OP is jumping to conclusions here. I honestly don't see how winning the AO will make him the indisputable GOAT.

...and *******s can lay off with the insults. If there is anything that we can pretty much all agree on, it's that:

a) Fed is at the moment the GOAT; but
b) Rafa is already up there somewhere, or at the very least well on his way

Fed has gotten to a point where even if he drops dead tomorrow, he'll still be topping the list. If Rafa drops dead tomorrow, he'll be nowhere near the top of that list. That said, he may well beat Fed if, and only if he follows our extrapolations. That means that there must not be a new player he will have difficulty beating (as Rafa is to Fed atm), and that his knees won't go kaputt on him (which has already happened once). Arguing that Rafa is better than Fed because of his winning record is a flawed argument; Kolya has a winning record against Rafa, but I don't see anyone arguing that he is better than Rafa, for example.

Where does that leave you? Nowhere; it's all speculation. At least *******s have got 16 GS, 17 Masters 1000, and 5 WTFs to cite; even with Nadal having more Masters 1000s titles under his belt, he's got to at least rival Fed's number of GS before you can even think about concluding Nadal as GOAT.No reasonable human being is denying that Nadal is definitely one of the greatest players of all time; what I'm saying is that calling him the GOAT is just uncalled for. It's just too soon.

Sensible post. First of all the whole idea of GOAT is stupid. How can you compare tennis players from different eras with different conditions, technology, etc?

However, if one is to consider Nadal the GOAT he absolutely has to equal or surpass Federer's 16 grand slam count. I am that rare breed that likes both Federer and Nadal but so much of the stuff thrown out there on Nadal being the best of all time, is speculation. He has a lot more to accomplish before he can catch up to Federer.

ledwix
01-18-2011, 06:04 PM
The transitive property is HORRIBLE at determining sporting greatness. Davydenko > Nadal > Federer > Davydenko. Contradiction. Etc. etc. for all the weak era crap and the "the guy who beat the guy who beat the weak era people is a strong era person, but everyone else is weak" BS.

Therefore, Nadalfan, your argument is horribly fallacious.

cc0509
01-18-2011, 06:06 PM
So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.

Yes, a joke era for everybody "other than Federer" because nobody could beat him!

hoodjem
01-18-2011, 06:06 PM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces.

Thoughts?Oooh, aaaah!

My thoughts are wondering what other silly superlative exclamations you can fabricate for The Mighty Rafa.?

"The only man in history to never step on the lines at . . . ."

phnx90
01-18-2011, 06:12 PM
As time => infinity, % of player x beating Rafa and Fed's record => 1

It certainly proved true for Sampras.

Therefore neither are GOAT

/thread?

ledwix
01-18-2011, 06:22 PM
As time => infinity, % of player x beating Rafa and Fed's record => 1

It certainly proved true for Sampras.

Therefore neither are GOAT

/thread?

That's true. We're all living in primitive, ancient times using archaic techniques to train our primeval athletes. In 100 years, everyone who plays professional tennis will be far better than Federer and Nadal. etc. etc.

In fact, why stop there? Nothing matters at all, even outside of sport. It's just conscious beings and inanimate matter dancing elegantly to the music of the physical laws endowed unto our universe.

phnx90
01-18-2011, 06:27 PM
It's just conscious beings and inanimate matter dancing elegantly to the music of the physical laws endowed unto our universe.

You friends with dozu by any chance? :p

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 06:41 PM
That's true. We're all living in primitive, ancient times using archaic techniques to train our primeval athletes. In 100 years, everyone who plays professional tennis will be far better than Federer and Nadal. etc. etc.

In fact, why stop there? Nothing matters at all, even outside of sport. It's just conscious beings and inanimate matter dancing elegantly to the music of the physical laws endowed unto our universe.

Wait a second. 'Consciousness' is self-declared. No objective data indicate we are actually conscious or experience it. Indeed all experience is subjective including the notion of experiencing.

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 07:03 PM
Bold 1) How can he be MIA? 2 SF at AO, 5 at FO, 4 at Wim and 3 at USO. How many GS SF's did Fed make it to at age 24?

Bold 2) How many slam finals did Fed make it to when he was 24? It's easy for you to compare Fed's achievements when he is 5 years older and therefore had more opportunies to reach those finals.

3) You don't care about h2h because Rafa owns him in that department, he couldn't even beat him on his favorite surface when it mattered most, he ended up crying in front of everyone. He must've learnt from his fellow countrywoman in Hingis didn't he?
1.) Compared to Federer, that's the definition of "MIA".

2.) What does age have to do with anything? Nadal has been a pro for only 3 years less than Federer. And when Federer is still getting to Slam semis at age 32, Nadal will be long retired.

3. Losing had absolutely nothing at all to do with Federer crying. He broke down due to the overwhelming display of affection and adoration from the crowd even though he disappointed them terribly. In fact, Federer cries more when he wins than when he loses.

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 07:05 PM
So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.
If Federer is playing in a "weak era" then so is Nadal since they both play in the SAME ERA! :oops:

drakulie
01-18-2011, 07:08 PM
So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.


If it's a joke era, then by your logic, Nadal is also a joke, since he has a winning record against a guy who in your book,,,,,"Is a joke". Not much to be proud of.

bms2011
01-18-2011, 08:06 PM
From 2005 to 2010 Nadal has won 11 slams. Federer has won 12 in those same years. Federer has 7 hard court 4 grass court and 1 clay court. In that same time Nadal had 2 hard court 2 grass court and 5 clay court major titles. Federer has a gold medal in doubles Nadal has a gold in singles. Federer has won 5 year end championships Nadal has won 0. Federer has 23 straight Major semifinals. Federer has 160 consecutive weeks at #1. Nadal has a career singles record of 475 wins and 102 losses. Federer has 748 wins and 174 losses. Federer in 12 years won 16 majors. Nadal in 9 years won 11 majors. Federer is by far more well rounded than Nadal.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:18 PM
From 2005 to 2010 Nadal has won 11 slams. Federer has won 12 in those same years. Federer has 7 hard court 4 grass court and 1 clay court. In that same time Nadal had 2 hard court 2 grass court and 5 clay court major titles. Federer has a gold medal in doubles Nadal has a gold in singles. Federer has won 5 year end championships Nadal has won 0. Federer has 23 straight Major semifinals. Federer has 160 consecutive weeks at #1. Nadal has a career singles record of 475 wins and 102 losses. Federer has 748 wins and 174 losses. Federer in 12 years won 16 majors. Nadal in 9 years won 11 majors. Federer is by far more well rounded than Nadal.

Wow, even with the false attribution of 11 majors, Nadal STILL pales in comparison!

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:31 PM
Yes, Nadal is a true loser compared to Federer. Except when he actually plays against Federer. Then Federer is the loser. LOL!!!!!!! :)

Not at their last encounter at the WTF. :)

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:35 PM
Yes, and that's why WTF now stands for What The F**k :)

Uh no it does not stand for that, just because Nadal has won it zero times :).

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 11:36 PM
Yes, Nadal is a true loser compared to Federer.
I agree 100%. :)

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 11:38 PM
Yes, and that's why WTF now stands for What The F**k :)
Yes, that's exactly what Nadal says when he loses the year-end championships every single year. He even says it in English! :shock: :)

Welsh Wizard
01-19-2011, 05:08 AM
If you want to be the ambassador of "good posting", at least try not to be biased. If Nadal-***** are 10-11 year-olds, at least they are acting their age. Fed-***** however are probably on average above 30, but act as if they were 6, by constantly reminding everyone Federer is the GOAT and that former greats are sh1t in comparison.


I agree on Murray. I hope he wins his first slam this year.

Champ, I make no bones about the fact that I prefer Federer's style of tennis to Nadal (and unfortunately I'm the wrong side of 30 :cry:) but that doesn't mean I don't like Nadal himself. I've actually had the privilige of meeting him briefly at Wimbledon and he's a nice bloke. I'm just not a fan of his game. In the same way I preferred Agassi to Sampras, etc. Before anyone, jumps on this, I've also met Fed the same way and he was also very pleasant!

However, I would "agree to disagree" with you about Fed-***** reminding everyone how Federer is the GOAT. Usually it is after some provocation. People of my age should know better and not rise to it, but my point was that it is getting silly now.

Everyone is perfectly entitled to support/follow whoever they want to but when we talk about who is currently the greatest we need to stop comparing stupid, meaningless stats and just compare the grand slam record. For now at least, Federer has more - but who knows what may happen in the future!?!?! - that's why I love the game!

Jchurch
01-19-2011, 05:13 AM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?


Major fact: Laver couldn't have a gold medal in an event that didn't exist.

aphex
01-19-2011, 05:19 AM
Major fact: Laver couldn't have a gold medal in an event that didn't exist.

Another fact: Laver couldn't win HC slams because they didn't exist.

Good luck explaining those little facts to braindead *****.

Sentinel
01-19-2011, 08:33 AM
wins the AO, he will be the only man in history to hold all four grandslams on four different surfaces. He will have dominated the tour on every single surface. Add the fact that he has a gold medal in singles, which Sampras, Laver and Federer do not have, and the fact that he has the most master's despite being in the middle of his career....I think it's safe to say that if he wins the AO, he's the GOAT.

Thoughts?

Comeon, nadalfan, Rafa is already the GOAT. you know that in your heart of hearts.

hey, oops, oh dear, do i see a Banned next to your name :shock:

dandelion_smiley
01-19-2011, 08:59 AM
So? You idiots claim Federer is GOAT because he took advantage of a joke era until Nadal came around like smacked everyone, including Federer, around like a real tennis player.

more like youre a joke of a poster, stop talking crap