PDA

View Full Version : DelPo is the reason *******s are now so excited


billnepill
01-17-2011, 07:40 PM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

edit: for clarification

Clay lover
01-17-2011, 07:45 PM
Don''t follow your logic at all...

What has it got to do with what *******s think now?

edit: oh i know what you mean now but to start a thread over this? The delpo argument has been beaten to death by Nad haters.

TBrady
01-17-2011, 07:48 PM
No one really knows why Nad ***** have their head so deep in a butt.

BreakPoint
01-17-2011, 07:49 PM
Yes, even the *********s know deep down that the only reason Nadal won the US Open was because he didn't have to play Del Potro, Federer, nor Murray. :shock:

billnepill
01-17-2011, 07:52 PM
Don''t follow your logic at all...

What has it got to do with what *******s think now?

4 Slams in a roll would be the biggest achievement since Laver, as some people think.

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

On the other hand, Nadal didn't have to face anyone from the calibre of DelPo at USO 10

TheNatural
01-17-2011, 07:57 PM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

Nadal was injured with an abdominal tear at the 09 US Open and that's the reason he didn't win the title.In 2010 when he wasn't injured he won it easily.Nadal also retired injured at the 2010 AO. Since Nadal has been injury free in slams he has won 3 straight with ease, so if not for those injuries this could easily be the 6th slam straight that Nadal is going for at the 2011 AO. A scary thought!:shock:

billnepill
01-17-2011, 08:00 PM
Nadal was injured with an abdominal tear at the 09 US Open and that's the reason he didn't win the title.In 2010 when he wasn't injured he won it easily.Nadal also retired injured at the 2010 AO. Since Nadal has been injury free in slams he has won 3 straight with ease, so if not for those injuries this could easily be the 6th slam straight that Nadal is going for at the 2011 AO. A scary thought!:shock:

That means that when he doesn't have an abdominal pain, he wins USO easily and that is easily proven with his history there?

And he reaches semifinal of his worst surface with abdominal pain?

BreakPoint
01-17-2011, 10:05 PM
Nadal was injured with an abdominal tear at the 09 US Open and that's the reason he didn't win the title.In 2010 when he wasn't injured he won it easily.Nadal also retired injured at the 2010 AO. Since Nadal has been injury free in slams he has won 3 straight with ease, so if not for those injuries this could easily be the 6th slam straight that Nadal is going for at the 2011 AO. A scary thought!:shock:
So Nadal has had an abdominal injury every year at the US open since 2003? :???:

Oh, and he won in 2010 because he didn't have to play Del Potro nor Murray nor Federer.

Bud
01-17-2011, 10:12 PM
4 Slams in a roll would be the biggest achievement since Laver, as some people think.

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

On the other hand, Nadal didn't have to face anyone from the calibre of DelPo at USO 10

Sure, Djokovic isn't at Del Potro's level :lol:

BreakPoint
01-17-2011, 10:15 PM
Sure, Djokovic isn't at Del Potro's level :lol:
Del Potro could hit anyone off of the court....and that would include Nadal, Federer, and, oh yeah, Djokovic.

rommil
01-17-2011, 10:18 PM
Sure, Djokovic isn't at Del Potro's level :lol:

You reckon, maybe 4.5 NTRP maybe?

Bud
01-17-2011, 10:21 PM
Del Potro could hit anyone off of the court....and that would include Nadal, Federer, and, oh yeah, Djokovic.

Right and what is Delpo's H2H against all those players you mentioned? Oh ya, it's negative :lol:

As a matter of fact, he's 0-3 against Djokovic

BreakPoint
01-17-2011, 10:35 PM
Right and what is Delpo's H2H against all those players you mentioned? Oh ya, it's negative :lol:

As a matter of fact, he's 0-3 against Djokovic
He won when it mattered, didn't he?

Oh, and if Del Potro sucks so much, why does he keep blowing Nadal away? :oops:

Bud
01-17-2011, 10:52 PM
He won when it mattered, didn't he?

Oh, and if Del Potro sucks so much, why does he keep blowing Nadal away? :oops:

Better go re-check Nadal-Delpo H2H ;)

billnepill
01-17-2011, 10:52 PM
Sure, Djokovic isn't at Del Potro's level

you mean that Djokovic who played 5 set thriller against Federer and begged for more rest before going to the final and that Del Potro who swept the court with Nadal in 2009 beating him 6-2 6-2 6-2? Yes, Djokovic wasn't at Del Potro's level in that situation.



Right and what is Delpo's H2H against all those players you mentioned? Oh ya, it's negative :lol:

As a matter of fact, he's 0-3 against Djokovic

Of course, it is negative, since he demonstrated his best tennis in a short time span. We are talking about summer 2009 and the H2H vs. Djokovic consists of 2 matches played on hard in 2007-2008 and 1 match played on clay in April 2009. Nicely played.

Anyways, if it wasn't for Del Potro the Roger Slam would be a fact :lol:

Bud
01-17-2011, 10:55 PM
you mean that Djokovic who played 5 set thriller against Federer and begged for more rest before going to the final and that Del Potro who swept the court with Nadal in 2009 beating him 6-2 6-2 6-2? Yes, Djokovic wasn't at Del Potro's level in that situation.





Of course, it is negative, since he demonstrated his best tennis in a short time span. We are talking about summer 2009 and the H2H vs. Djokovic consists of 2 matches played on hard in 2007-2008 and 1 match played on clay in April 2009. Nicely played.

Anyways, if it wasn't for Del Potro the Roger Slam would be a fact :lol:

If 2 of the 4 GS tournaments were played on clay, Nadal would have already passed Federer in number of GS titles ;)

billnepill
01-17-2011, 10:57 PM
If 2 of the 4 GS tournaments were played on clay, Nadal would have already passed Federer in number of GS titles ;)

you mean I should skip the IF and talk about the Roger Slam as you all do about the Rafa Slam?:confused:

Bud
01-17-2011, 10:59 PM
you mean I should skip the IF and talk about the Roger Slam as you all do about the Rafa Slam?:confused:

Sure, go for it :)

aceX
01-17-2011, 11:08 PM
If 2 of the 4 GS tournaments were played on clay, Nadal would have already passed Federer in number of GS titles ;)

The only non-clay slam is cincy and WTF

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 12:30 AM
Better go re-check Nadal-Delpo H2H ;)
No need to check. Del Potro is 3-0 versus Nadal in their last 3 matches. :oops:

Underhand
01-18-2011, 12:33 AM
Cool story, *******

BreakPoint
01-18-2011, 12:33 AM
If 2 of the 4 GS tournaments were played on clay, Nadal would have already passed Federer in number of GS titles ;)
And if all 4 Grand Slams were played on the old fast grass, Federer would have 100 Slams and Nadal would have zero. :shock: :wink:

aphex
01-18-2011, 12:41 AM
And if all 4 Grand Slams were played on the old fast grass, Federer would have 100 Slams and Nadal would have zero. :shock: :wink:

Also, if all tournaments were on indoor wood, Ralph would have 0 titles and be about #1243 in the world...

big bang
01-18-2011, 01:20 AM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

edit: for clarification

cool story:roll:
And if Chang were 6 ft tall and had Gorans serve and Beckers shoes he would have won 30+ slams, ah ok maybe would have needed Agassis bandana as well. Another idiotic troll thread:roll:

angiebaby
01-18-2011, 02:01 AM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

edit: for clarification

Shoulda woulda coulda. Fed could have but he didn't. Delpo would have but he didn't. Isn't it easier, not to mention more productive, to deal with reality rather than futile hypotheticals?

billnepill
01-18-2011, 03:09 AM
cool story:roll:
And if Chang were 6 ft tall and had Gorans serve and Beckers shoes he would have won 30+ slams, ah ok maybe would have needed Agassis bandana as well. Another idiotic troll thread:roll:

just pointing out that Federer was 1 set away from the same feet as the broadly discussed possiblity of Nadal winning 4 slams in a row. I also claim that Nadal was lucky 09 Del Potro didn't show up, because I think he performed better than Djokovic in the 10 final.

In this case, "Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda" is helpful because it helps to evaluate how difficult is to achieve a particular thing. Federer got very, very close several times to achieving that particular accomplishment which is now hyped as the biggest achievement in tennis ever.

For example, in comparision, no one has been even close to:

- 18 finals out of 19 Grand Slam tournaments, 10 of which consecutive (2005 Wimbledon - 2010 Australian Open, 12 won)

- Borg's three consecutive doubles - WB- RG

This readiness of some people to put Nadal eventual 4 consecutive Slams (not a CGS, I hope you agree) over these records (and few others) is the "idiotic" thing ( if you allow me to borrow your description).

The forgetfulness here is sometimes staggering.

nadal_slam_king
01-18-2011, 03:13 AM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

edit: for clarification

I take it you've never heard of the CHAOS THEORY. If Federer won the 2009 US Open there is absolutely no reason to think he'd have won the 2010 AO.

NadalAgassi
01-18-2011, 03:20 AM
Stupid thread. First of all Del Potro is yet another ridicously overhyped TW player who outside of his one huge title at the U.S Open hasnt won anything bigger than an ATP 500. He hasnt even won a Masters title. And as others has said is owned in head to head by Djokovic and Murray.

Second of all Federer wasnt going for the Roger slam since he blew the 2009 U.S Open final. Anyone who watched the match can see that he should have won the match in straight sets but got lazy and casual in the 2nd set when he had all kinds of opportunities to put a strangehold on the match. His fault. On the other hand he never should have gotten that opportunity since it was only Nadal's injuries around the French and Wimbledon which made it possible in the first place.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 03:38 AM
Shoulda woulda coulda. Fed could have but he didn't. Delpo would have but he didn't. Isn't it easier, not to mention more productive, to deal with reality rather than futile hypotheticals?
I wish some told that to Descartes. I am reading his philosophical work and it is pure agony. The guy must been baked 24/7.

Hitman
01-18-2011, 03:42 AM
Another awesome thread for *******s and *******s to show how big their jockstraps are....

I don't understand why there is so much hate, and this goes both ways.

Both Federer and Nadal are incredible players, players that rarely come. And we get to see them both playing, should we be happy that we are lucky to see this, instead of reading about on the internet 20 years from now...or should we be annoyed because they are ruining tennis?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 03:54 AM
Cool story, *******

Wow I'm surprised a ********* can even read!

amaze
01-18-2011, 04:07 AM
Yep.

But here is the difference between the classy tennis fans and, ummm, opportunistic gloryhunters. When Fed lost to del Potro not a single fan of him thought "OMG mini-slam opportunity gone". We took that defeat with pride. Nadal fans, on the other hand, are already building towers of excuses why Rafa may slip on his way to mini-slam.

ksbh
01-18-2011, 06:40 AM
Simple question for Federer lovers ... what happened to your 'pre-FO 2010 final' love for Robin SoderKing?! ROFL!

T1000
01-18-2011, 06:49 AM
And if Federer had beaten Nadal in the AO 2009 he would've had four slams in a row too. Maybe he shouldn't have folded in those two 5th sets....

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 06:52 AM
As for you, do you have a helper monkey to do it for you? :)

Yes, thank YOU. :)

Djokolate
01-18-2011, 06:58 AM
Delpo denied Federer the chance to win 4 Slams in a row in 2009-2010 by beating him at US Open. If he only knew he was on the verge of doing something more significant than Laver GS.... :mrgreen:

Federer won FO 09, WB 09, reached US final 09 against Delpo and won AO 10.

If he won against DelPo, he would have won 4 Slams in a row with the winning of AO in 2010 and there would be no hyping of the situation now with Nadal.

Delpo also wasn't a factor at 2010 USO, cause he was injured. If he had showed up with his 2009 form, I believe, my fellow *******s, there wouldn't have been fireworks and champagne at the USO.

Of course, the runs of both Federer and Nadal in 2009 and 2010 are extraordinary. It turns out, Del Potro made the difference.

edit: for clarification

high five man
you are so right
but i never see fedfans moaning fair play 2 them
djoko always has to play fed somehow 'cries' and if he wins THEN djoko plays nadal :evil:
my fave players 1 to 3
djoko
fed
delpo

Djokolate
01-18-2011, 07:02 AM
Simple question for Federer lovers ... what happened to your 'pre-FO 2010 final' love for Robin SoderKing?! ROFL!

nadals a legend on clay no question but if nadal played as bad as he did against soderling then federer would've won

aceX
01-18-2011, 01:47 PM
The only non-clay slam is cincy and WTF

Cup8489
01-18-2011, 03:36 PM
Simple question for Federer lovers ... what happened to your 'pre-FO 2010 final' love for Robin SoderKing?! ROFL!

Soderking ftw. he just needs to get his head together in the finals of grand slams. once he does, watch out!

TBH, i never even realized how close federer once again was to the Roger slam.

3 diff occasions then? he's been 2 sets away 3 different times?

oh, 23 semifinals in a row.

hmm.

these flame wars are ********... why would you risk your life entering this thread, ksbh?

We are better men than these trolls present..

Murrayfan31
01-18-2011, 04:19 PM
Or even Murray would've stopped the fireworks. Wawrinka had to have the match of his life. :(

The-Champ
01-18-2011, 04:27 PM
The only non-clay slam is cincy and WTF

don't forget Basel.

kishnabe
01-18-2011, 06:14 PM
The only non-clay slam is cincy and WTF

You mean anything Nadal hasn't won :rolleyes:

Federer is the best no doubt....why take this 4 slam too seriously. More importantly is enjoying the Aussie matches.

Murrayfan31
01-18-2011, 06:33 PM
You mean anything Nadal hasn't won :rolleyes:

Federer is the best no doubt....why take this 4 slam too seriously. More importantly is enjoying the Aussie matches.
The courts have been damn slow. US Open looked like blue clay. I couldn't believe it. Cincy looked a heck of a lot faster.

billnepill
01-18-2011, 06:48 PM
sorry for this thread

I was watching DelPo the other day and was thinking about it.

I also found it annoying that some people hype Rafa Slam so much in 100 threads, as if other tennis records were nothing.

I wonder why given that I enjoy this rivalry, their matches and respect their success, I feel like I need to prove how Federer is superior to Rafa everytime I read some threads here. I guess, itīs the Fedal, H2H, GOAT, who-is-better-thing thatīs discussed here.

I feel like an ***** now, because I was unfair to Nadal and the things he has done. How it's his fault that there are 2-3 % people who are very extreme and stir everything up on purpose, because they want to be significant even though anonymous in an internet forum?

I think I'm done with Fedal threads from now on. It makes me appear as a freakin' hater and I just want to enjoy their tennis some more.