PDA

View Full Version : Ralph's 2010: Not that good, really...


aphex
01-18-2011, 04:53 AM
71 wins-10 losses

That's probably not even top 5 in the open era...

Andres
01-18-2011, 04:57 AM
And yet, he won three slams in a row. Absolutely top 5 in the open era.

amaze
01-18-2011, 05:01 AM
Who cares when the guy is in top-1 of the most humble players of all time.

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:02 AM
And yet, he won three slams in a row. Absolutely top 5 in the open era.

I'm talking W/L...

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 05:05 AM
Probably barely top 10. Winning slams surely is most important but maintaing a good WL is what differentiates the truly special player

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:07 AM
It is very similar to Federer's 2007 record. 68-9 W-L, 3 grand slams, and 8 titles. Nadal just had 1 less title.

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:08 AM
Who cares when the guy is in top-1 of the most humble humans, animals or plants of all time.

fixed.....

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:09 AM
Who cares when the guy is in top-1 of the most humble players of all time.
I lol at these statements. Have you ever heard of Arthur Ashe?

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:10 AM
I lol at these statements. Have you ever heard of Arthur Ashe?

Have you ever heard of sarcasm?

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:13 AM
Have you ever heard of sarcasm?
http://talkingshrimp.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/I-dunno-lol1.jpg

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 05:16 AM
It is very similar to Federer's 2007 record. 68-9 W-L, 3 grand slams, and 8 titles. Nadal just had 1 less title.

And 2007 was not even Feds best !!

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:19 AM
And 2007 was not even Feds best !!

More like 3rd or 4th best...

namelessone
01-18-2011, 05:31 AM
71 wins-10 losses

That's probably not even top 5 in the open era...

Worst player in the world yet he shows up in many TW discussions.

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:34 AM
Worst player in the world yet he shows up in many TW discussions.

Stop hating on Ralph!

Underhand
01-18-2011, 05:39 AM
Worst player in the world yet he shows up in many TW discussions.

Lot of them started by Fediots... Like this one.

aphex
01-18-2011, 05:54 AM
Lot of them started by Fediots... Like this one.

...and followed religiously by terminally unfunny tools...like you.

Speranza
01-18-2011, 06:12 AM
Holmes: Hmmm, not sure if it was or wasn't. Either way, seeing Ralph in a thread title makes me smile, still. ;)

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 08:11 AM
Nadal sweeps the entire clay season, wins three grandslams on three different surfaces (consecutively) and his year wasn't good?

Tell me more, *******!

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:19 AM
Nadal sweeps the entire clay season, wins three grandslams on three different surfaces (consecutively) and his year wasn't good?

Tell me more, *******!

It was good. Just not as good as Federer's 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, when you also factor in the all important W-L.

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 08:27 AM
It was good. Just not as good as Federer's 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, when you also factor in the all important W-L.

All those years Federer could barely get a win on clay. He didn't even win one French open in all those years and they were better than Nada's 2010? Yeah okay...

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:29 AM
All those years Federer could barely get a win on clay. He didn't even win one French open in all those years and they were better than Nada's 2010? Yeah okay...

I believe in those years Federer really only lost to Nadal on clay. Check 2006. Nadal ONLY won FO's in all those years. The only reason he had such great 2008 and 2010 was due to Fed injuries.

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 08:30 AM
I believe in those years Federer really only lost to Nadal on clay. Check 2006. Nadal ONLY won FO's in all those years. The only reason he had such great 2008 and 2010 was due to Fed injuries.

Oh, please enlighten us on what injuries allowed Nadal to sweep three grandslams in a row?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:31 AM
Oh, please enlighten us on what injuries allowed Nadal to sweep three grandslams in a row?

Fed had a lung infection at the beginning of the year and leg injury during W10. Rafa won USO10 legitimately however, with a cakewalk draw. We'll see what happens when the law of averages takes over.

Andres
01-18-2011, 08:35 AM
Fed had a lung infection at the beginning of the year and leg injury during W10. Rafa won USO10 legitimately however, with a cakewalk draw. We'll see what happens when the law of averages takes over.
I believe the right expression is BOO HOO.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:36 AM
I believe the right expression is BOO HOO.

Yeah kinda like in 2009 when Rafa skipped out due to "injuries"? :)

Andres
01-18-2011, 08:38 AM
Yeah kinda like in 2009 when Rafa skipped out due to "injuries"? :)
Yes, kinda like

aphex
01-18-2011, 08:54 AM
Just because you have fingers it doesn't mean you have to type, as this thread clearly shows.

Just because you have a head it doesn't mean you have to stick it up Ralph's arse, as your reply clearly shows.

aphex
01-18-2011, 08:57 AM
Nadal sweeps the entire clay season, wins three grandslams on three different surfaces (consecutively) and his year wasn't good?

Tell me more, *******!

What do you wanna know Ralphette?

How many players have had years with fewer than 10 losses and a better W/L ratio?

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:04 AM
Yeah kinda like in 2009 when Rafa skipped out due to "injuries"? :)

my friend got mono recently,I'm hoping it's the Roger Federer type where you can play top level tennis and get cured when you win a slam title

aphex
01-18-2011, 09:06 AM
my friend got mono recently,I'm hoping it's the Roger Federer type where you can play top level tennis and get cured when you win a slam title

You mean 9 months later? Yeah, me too.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:12 AM
You mean 9 months later? Yeah, me too.

you're also hoping that my friend only got "lame mono", you're a really caring person

Manus Domini
01-18-2011, 09:17 AM
All those years Federer could barely get a win on clay. He didn't even win one French open in all those years and they were better than Nada's 2010? Yeah okay...

I'm not saying that Rafa's year wasn't good when I say what I am saying, but bear with me:

Fed's 3 slams and a slam final is better than 3 slams and a non-slam final, especially when Fed could make the finals of RG consecutively for years...

ksbh
01-18-2011, 09:18 AM
ROFL X 2500, V!

See, Roger Federer is a truly unique player ... he can play high level tennis with mono yet when the light diminishes ever so slightly, as it did in the Wimbledon final 2008 against Rafa, he can't play good enough, losing in 5 sets! ROFL!

my friend got mono recently,I'm hoping it's the Roger Federer type where you can play top level tennis and get cured when you win a slam title

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 09:23 AM
my friend got mono recently,I'm hoping it's the Roger Federer type where you can play top level tennis and get cured when you win a slam title

Certainly, but the real miracles is having tendonitis that allows you to destroy Hewitt in a Major and then at the same time allows you to use it as an excuse for skipping Wimbledon. Now that's magic!

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 09:25 AM
And yet, he won three slams in a row. Absolutely top 5 in the open era.

Won 2, cheated to win at Wimbledon.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:26 AM
ROFL X 2500, V!

See, Roger Federer is a truly unique player ... he can play high level tennis with mono yet when the light diminishes ever so slightly, as it did in the Wimbledon final 2008 against Rafa, he can't play good enough, losing in 5 sets! ROFL!

IMHO they shouldn't have let Rafa wear those night vision goggles, that was just unfair

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 09:26 AM
Who cares when the guy is in top-1 of the most fake players of all time.

fixed it for you.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:29 AM
Certainly, but the real miracles is having tendonitis that allows you to destroy Hewitt in a Major and then at the same time allows you to use it as an excuse for skipping Wimbledon. Now that's magic!

I wasn't talking about magic,I was talking about mononucleosis type RF,if you don't believe me read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/types_of_mononucleosis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0)

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 09:30 AM
Oh, please enlighten us on what injuries allowed Nadal to sweep three grandslams in a row?

Well, Nadal's own "injury" at Wimbledon's 3rd round allowed him to win that match. In fact, Nadal should thank the "injuries", or "injury timeouts" I should say. Nadal won many titles BECAUSE he was "injured". The most fake champion of all time.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:31 AM
Won 2, cheated to win at Wimbledon.

that's called being smart

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 09:33 AM
that's called being smart

Smart? Maybe. But with that he is also fake and a cheater. If you are willing to respect a person like that then have fun. I know I can't.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 09:38 AM
Smart? Maybe. But with that he is also fake and a cheater. If you are willing to respect a person like that then have fun. I know I can't.

yeah,everyone knows that,really
you can shut up for a while with that and post something else for a change

nadalbestclass
01-18-2011, 09:44 AM
I'm not saying that Rafa's year wasn't good when I say what I am saying, but bear with me:

Fed's 3 slams and a slam final is better than 3 slams and a non-slam final, especially when Fed could make the finals of RG consecutively for years...

Where did Fed come in?

Nadal had a great year. He came back from a lot of injury and a really BAD 11 months. To come back in style like that, beats any other numbers. What a true champion.

MichaelNadal
01-18-2011, 09:46 AM
Where did Fed come in?

Nadal had a great year. He came back from a lot of injury and a really BAD 11 months. To come back in style like that, beats any other numbers. What a true champion.

Twas a terrible 11 months. The turnaround was fantastic for sure.

nadalbestclass
01-18-2011, 09:47 AM
Well, Nadal's own "injury" at Wimbledon's 3rd round allowed him to win that match. In fact, Nadal should thank the "injuries", or "injury timeouts" I should say. Nadal won many titles BECAUSE he was "injured". The most fake champion of all time.

1) Get over it.

2) LOL at the idea that Nadal would have lost that match. Sorry but Petz's streak was about over when Rafa took his MTO. Result would have been no different.

Cesc Fabregas
01-18-2011, 10:06 AM
Nadal cheated to win Wimbledon, when the umpire turned round he hit Petz with a steal chair.

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 10:07 AM
yeah,everyone knows that,really
you can shut up for a while with that and post something else for a change

Or better, YOU can shut up and just ignore my posts if you don't like them. How about that?

Andres
01-18-2011, 10:09 AM
Well, Nadal's own "injury" at Wimbledon's 3rd round allowed him to win that match. In fact, Nadal should thank the "injuries", or "injury timeouts" I should say. Nadal won many titles BECAUSE he was "injured". The most fake champion of all time.
You remind me of the babe

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 10:09 AM
1) Get over it.

2) LOL at the idea that Nadal would have lost that match. Sorry but Petz's streak was about over when Rafa took his MTO. Result would have been no different.

I love it how all the ***** reply with the likes of "shut up" or "get over it" because obviously they don't have any valid points to add. Anyway, let's focus at the AO, if Nadal wins that he would have completed the "Cheater Slam".

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 10:11 AM
You remind me of the babe

How you refer to your boyfriend is none of my buisness.

aphex
01-18-2011, 10:15 AM
Nadal cheated to win Wimbledon, when the umpire turned round he hit Petz with a steal chair.

Concentrate on watching "Jersey Shore" and abandon writing. Forever.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 10:16 AM
Or better, YOU can shut up and just ignore my posts if you don't like them. How about that?

I ignore them 99% of the time,be happy with that

aphex
01-18-2011, 10:16 AM
How you refer to your boyfriend is none of my buisness.

lololololololololol

meg0529
01-18-2011, 10:17 AM
You remind me of the babe

What babe?:confused:

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 10:20 AM
I ignore them 99% of the time,be happy with that

Put me on the ignore list as I'm obivously not contributing to the conversation according to you. Otherwise, stop complaining.

Andres
01-18-2011, 10:27 AM
What babe?:confused:
The babe with the power

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 10:30 AM
The babe with the power

Snap!?
...

Jchurch
01-18-2011, 10:33 AM
my friend got mono recently,I'm hoping it's the Roger Federer type where you can play top level tennis and get cured when you win a slam title

As someone who suffers from chronic mono, it isn't fun. I routinely have a reoccurrence every 6 months or so. Federer didn't have the worse case of mono you could possibly have. That would probably be Ancic. Don't be so quick to write mono of as a disease which comes and goes very quickly. I assure you it doesn't.

cknobman
01-18-2011, 10:35 AM
Honestly Nadal had an outstanding year last year.

What troubles me is all the press and commentary over emphasizes how good it was and leaves the average viewers with the impression that no other player in the last 20+ years has come close to a season like that.

Have they all forgotten that Federer has had 2 (you could even argue 3) of these types of seasons in the last decade??????

Fickle and forgetful people.

Jchurch
01-18-2011, 10:35 AM
ROFL X 2500, V!

See, Roger Federer is a truly unique player ... he can play high level tennis with mono yet when the light diminishes ever so slightly, as it did in the Wimbledon final 2008 against Rafa, he can't play good enough, losing in 5 sets! ROFL!

How dark was it? Just curious? Were you there? Did you just watch it on TV? Do you know that the images displayed on the TV are enhanced for ease of viewing?

Jchurch
01-18-2011, 10:36 AM
that's called being smart

That's called not having honor.

ksbh
01-18-2011, 10:40 AM
J ... I wasn't there. But lets not forget that his opponent played in the same conditions, so Federer shouldn't have been the sore loser that he is. But nothing surprising with his behavior though. Some players can't stop whining!

How dark was it? Just curious? Were you there? Did you just watch it on TV? Do you know that the images displayed on the TV are enhanced for ease of viewing?

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 10:42 AM
J ... I wasn't there. But lets not forget that his opponent played in the same conditions, so Federer shouldn't have been the sore loser that he is. But nothing surprising with his behavior though. Some players can't stop whining!

And you're a fan of the biggest whiner/cheater/sore loser/faker on tour.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 10:45 AM
I wasn't talking about magic,I was talking about mononucleosis type RF,if you don't believe me read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/types_of_mononucleosis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0)

Indeed magic is reserved for nadal and his *****

aphex
01-18-2011, 10:45 AM
J ... I wasn't there. But lets not forget that his opponent played in the same conditions, so Federer shouldn't have been the sore loser that he is. But nothing surprising with his behavior though. Some players can't stop whining!

Unfortunately for Ralph, whenever he changed sides at Madrid the altitude used to change as well...poor Ralph...

ksbh
01-18-2011, 10:49 AM
Which is why I think Rafa & Giant nose are the biggest whiners this sport has ever seen. You Federer lovers are so blinded by your hero worship, you'll never see it though!

And you're a fan of the biggest whiner/cheater/sore loser/faker on tour.

Unfortunately for Ralph, whenever he changed sides at Madrid the altitude used to change as well...poor Ralph...

Turning Pro
01-18-2011, 10:51 AM
the difference between feds 3 slam winning years and nadals is:

Nadal won on Clay, grass AND hard. Fed only won on 2 hard and 1 grass.

Also arguably, the Aus Open is less prestigious than the French........

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 10:55 AM
As someone who suffers from chronic mono, it isn't fun. I routinely have a reoccurrence every 6 months or so. Federer didn't have the worse case of mono you could possibly have. That would probably be Ancic. Don't be so quick to write mono of as a disease which comes and goes very quickly. I assure you it doesn't.

I think you missed my point

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 10:56 AM
the difference between feds 3 slam winning years and nadals is:

Nadal won on Clay, grass AND hard. Fed only won on 2 hard and 1 grass.

Also arguably, the Aus Open is less prestigious than the USO........

fixed.....

aphex
01-18-2011, 10:58 AM
Which is why I think Rafa & Giant nose are the biggest whiners this sport has ever seen. You Federer lovers are so blinded by your hero worship, you'll never see it though!

That's what you Ralphettes can never understand...

I don't give a flying f*ck what Federer is outside the tennis-court.

I only like what I see in there.

I could not care less if Federer is the most vile, disgusting, horrible person on Earth...

On the other hand, you Ralphettes have built Nadal into this kind of deity...

I just care about the tennis.

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 11:02 AM
That's called not having honor.

why?


10 Bravehearth movies

meg0529
01-18-2011, 11:09 AM
The babe with the power

What Power??:evil:

Jchurch
01-18-2011, 11:12 AM
Nadal cheated to win Wimbledon, when the umpire turned round he hit Petz with a steal chair.

Your posts are becoming much more humorous. But yes I agree. We will see Nadal on WWE in the next few years.

Andres
01-18-2011, 11:19 AM
What Power??:evil:
The power of voodoo!

Bud
01-18-2011, 11:27 AM
the difference between feds 3 slam winning years and nadals is:

Nadal won on Clay, grass AND hard. Fed only won on 2 hard and 1 grass.

Also arguably, the Aus Open is less prestigious than the French........

Yup... a 3 slam year across clay, grass and HC >>> a 3 slam year across HC and grass.

TMF
01-18-2011, 11:29 AM
Yup... a 3 slam year across clay, grass and HC >>> a 3 slam year across HC and grass.

And 1 WTF > 0 WTF :neutral:

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 11:31 AM
Which is why I think Rafa & Giant nose are the biggest whiners this sport has ever seen. You Federer lovers are so blinded by your hero worship, you'll never see it though!

No, Federer is a huge whiner. I said it many times. He's also a sore loser at times and arrogant. But a cheater he ain't.

dandelion_smiley
01-18-2011, 11:33 AM
Yup... a 3 slam year across clay, grass and HC >>> a 3 slam year across HC and grass.

just like

7 titles > 12 titles?
0 WTF > 1 WTF
3 MS titles > 4 MS titles
having a 3.500 advantage over the no 2 > having around 7.500-8.000 advantage over the no 2
3 Slams + 1 quarter > 3 Slams + 1 final
88 % matches won > 95 % matches won
losing to 8-9 different players > losing 4 out of 5 total matches to Nadal (3 of them on clay)
playing like 50 % of finals > playing 94 % finals

I can go on forever

TBrady
01-18-2011, 11:34 AM
Aphex, 3 majors is not that good? Even if he lost every match besides the slams it is a phenomenal season.

I think you are just winding up the wedgy fans. Continue at will sir.

Dilettante
01-18-2011, 11:34 AM
Since when 3 slams in a single season is not a great year?

veroniquem
01-18-2011, 11:35 AM
Yes, a 3 master and 3 slam season is really pitiful. Is he gonna retire if his 2011 is as mediocre? That's the big question now.

The-Champ
01-18-2011, 11:36 AM
No, Federer is a huge whiner. I said it many times. He's also a sore loser at times and arrogant. But a cheater he ain't.

when Nadal won wimbledon. Did you do this?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XbdawY0OSUc/SYXHpzCMfOI/AAAAAAAADFE/9-NNvKfhKIc/s400/roger+16.jpg

rovex
01-18-2011, 11:36 AM
Ralphs hair is not as good as FeVer's

viduka0101
01-18-2011, 11:36 AM
just like

7 titles > 12 titles?
0 WTF > 1 WTF
3 MS titles > 4 MS titles
having a 3.500 advantage over the no 2 > having around 7.500-8.000 advantage over the no 2
3 Slams + 1 quarter > 3 Slams + 1 final
88 % matches won > 95 % matches won
losing to 8-9 different players > losing 4 out of 5 total matches to Nadal (3 of them on clay)
playing like 50 % of finals > playing 94 % finals

I can go on forever

no you can't
I dare you, goon forever

dandelion_smiley
01-18-2011, 11:49 AM
no you can't
I dare you, goon forever

seriously, I can compare 20 more things in Federer's favor without even checking the details.

More MS won, more MS finals, more MS wins, better % win in MS, more matches won in MS, more wins in less participations, more wins in Slams, better % in Slams, more top 10 players beaten, almost perfect win % against players outside the top 2 (only 1 loss to Murray, the rest to Nadal), more wins in season, less losses in season, better % win in season, better win % on hard courts, on grass courts, less losses on hard courts, no losses on grass courts, more top tenners beaten in a Slam, more bagel sets won, single digit number of losses in year, 2 times less losses in a year, less straight-set losses, more sets won, less sets lost, more games won, less game lost, a 30+ match winning streak, more ranking points than his nearest rival, 2 Slam titles defended

Federer had an almost perfect 2006, there is nothing about Nadal's 2010 that is better than Fed's 2006 and if you take out his clay losses in the finals to Nadal his season actually WAS perfect

Hitman
01-18-2011, 11:54 AM
Hmmm.

Aphex, there is no need for this. There is so much hate on these boards already.

Rafa had a dream year, even Federer said so. He may not have the McEnroe 84 winning percentage, but he still won pretty much most of the matches that count.

TBrady
01-18-2011, 11:54 AM
http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/12/karateowned.jpg (http://www.threadbombing.com/details.php?image_id=2263)

ksbh
01-18-2011, 12:07 PM
ROFL X 500, I'm not surprised ... you fanboys are all just the same!

That's what you Ralphettes can never understand...

I don't give a flying f*ck what Federer is outside the tennis-court.

I only like what I see in there.

I could not care less if Federer is the most vile, disgusting, horrible person on Earth...

On the other hand, you Ralphettes have built Nadal into this kind of deity...

I just care about the tennis.

Gorecki
01-18-2011, 12:18 PM
ROFL X 500, I'm not surprised ... you fanboys are all just the same!

they are are they not?

:rolleyes:

aphex
01-18-2011, 12:30 PM
Since when 3 slams in a single season is not a great year?

Since Ralphettes who started watching tennis a couple of years ago began stating it's "TEH BESTEST YEER EEEEVA!!"

aphex
01-18-2011, 12:32 PM
ROFL X 500, I'm not surprised ... you fanboys are all just the same!

You morons are all the same...no reading comprehension skills.

ksbh
01-18-2011, 01:11 PM
I was watching a movie yesterday and one of the guys said to another ... 'you better step away from the mirror because you're gonna scare the crap out of yourself'! LOL!

But yes, you're right ... they are!

they are are they not?

:rolleyes:

P_Agony
01-18-2011, 01:21 PM
when Nadal won wimbledon. Did you do this?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XbdawY0OSUc/SYXHpzCMfOI/AAAAAAAADFE/9-NNvKfhKIc/s400/roger+16.jpg

Nah, when Nadal cheated to win Wimbledon, I received a huge paycheck at the time from my job. Being a programmer pays off!

Gorecki
01-18-2011, 02:03 PM
ROFL x /$&$$&((&&((=$(=%$?(

I was watching a movie yesterday and one of the guys said to another ... 'you better step away from the mirror because you're gonna scare the crap out of yourself'! LOL!

But yes, you're right ... they are!

you dont say? that is a great quote. was it another of those great movies of Punjabi Samosa? or Talvin Sing or Tikka Masala or whatever obscure bollywood name you come up with?

you know... those half funny half dorlish joke\jabs (scratch the least important) you take at Federer, Agassi and anyone who is unlucky not to be Rafael Nadal?

another great quote...

"you should not underestimate the predictability of stupidity"...

Manuel "Codfish" Costa Albuquerque dixit...

Cesc Fabregas
01-18-2011, 02:41 PM
Concentrate on watching "Jersey Shore" and abandon writing. Forever.

Will do. Jersey Shore season 3 starts on Feburary 1st here in the UK.

http://www.ivstatic.com/files/et/imagecache/636/files/blog_articles/jersey-shore_3.jpg

Dilettante
01-18-2011, 03:00 PM
Since Ralphettes who started watching tennis a couple of years ago began stating it's "TEH BESTEST YEER EEEEVA!!"

I don't understand this argument. I don't see the relation between the competitive value of a sports season and what some fans could say about it.

When a player wins three of the four major titles of a given sport, that's a wonderful season and trying to imply it has been "not so good" is simply as nonsensical and irrational as saying "teh bestest yeer eeeeva!".

dh003i
01-18-2011, 03:29 PM
Probably barely top 10. Winning slams surely is most important but maintaing a good WL is what differentiates the truly special player

I think slams are most important, not W-L record. 3 slams in a year is a phenomenal achievement.

veroniquem
01-18-2011, 03:39 PM
This is a completely absurd discussion. I couldn't care less if Fed (or anyone else for that matter) had a better season than Rafa in 2010.
A- regardless, winning slams on clay, grass and hard in 1 season is the most phenomenal achievement I've ever seen in tennis.
B- Nadal's winning % is higher than Fed's overall. That is by far the most important. Couldn't care less about isolating particular seasons. Nadal's added seasons are better than Fed's added seasons, period.

Jchurch
01-18-2011, 04:05 PM
I think slams are most important, not W-L record. 3 slams in a year is a phenomenal achievement.

I understand what you are saying, but look at W-L as icing on the cake. Even if you just count slams, which I believe to be an unfair and biased way of measuring a season, he is still at number 6 at the maximum in terms of open era seasons. Then you run into a whole host of problems when you have seasons like McEnroe's 84 and Willander's 88.

Xemi666
01-18-2011, 04:06 PM
Your trolling isn't that good either, really... way too obvious.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 04:24 PM
This is a completely absurd discussion. I couldn't care less if Fed (or anyone else for that matter) had a better season than Rafa in 2010.
A- regardless, winning slams on clay, grass and hard in 1 season is the most phenomenal achievement I've ever seen in tennis.
B- Nadal's winning % is higher than Fed's overall. That is by far the most important. Couldn't care less about isolating particular seasons. Nadal's added seasons are better than Fed's added seasons, period.

:neutral:


But yeah, stupid thread.

Semi-Pro
01-18-2011, 04:42 PM
:neutral:


But yeah, stupid thread.

*ponders*

lol

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 04:47 PM
I think slams are most important, not W-L record. 3 slams in a year is a phenomenal achievement.

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 04:48 PM
:neutral:


But yeah, stupid thread.

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Pwned!!!!! :)

abmk
01-18-2011, 04:58 PM
This is a completely absurd discussion. I couldn't care less if Fed (or anyone else for that matter) had a better season than Rafa in 2010.
A- regardless, winning slams on clay, grass and hard in 1 season is the most phenomenal achievement I've ever seen in tennis.
B- Nadal's winning % is higher than Fed's overall. That is by far the most important. Couldn't care less about isolating particular seasons. Nadal's added seasons are better than Fed's added seasons, period.

:neutral:


But yeah, stupid thread.

ha ha ha, that's a classic example of brilliant self-ownage !!!! :)

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:02 PM
Will do. Jersey Shore season 3 starts on Feburary 1st here in the UK.

http://www.ivstatic.com/files/et/imagecache/636/files/blog_articles/jersey-shore_3.jpg
These 8 creatures need to be shipped off to some desolate island and be subjected to nuclear annihilation.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 05:03 PM
:neutral:


But yeah, stupid thread.
http://www.citizenx.cx/img/amusing/animations/ascii/lolwtfbbq.gif

Messarger
01-18-2011, 05:14 PM
I don't understand this argument. I don't see the relation between the competitive value of a sports season and what some fans could say about it.

When a player wins three of the four major titles of a given sport, that's a wonderful season and trying to imply it has been "not so good" is simply as nonsensical and irrational as saying "teh bestest yeer eeeeva!".

Dilenttante, are you male or female?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:15 PM
You are not too intelligent. Nadal had to play the rest of the field in 2008 and 2010, regardless of Fed's form. Although sometimes I think Rafa would rather just play Fed only, judging by their H2H.

I'm sure Davydenko feels the same way towards Nadal given THEIR H2H ;)

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:26 PM
You can't even compare the two H2Hs. Nadal and Fed have played quite a few GS finals, and Rafa has won against the so-called GOAT in all surfaces. The Davy vs Nadal H2H is an anecdote. 4 vs 6 is not a massacre, unlike 14 vs 8. Furthermore, none of Nadal's defeats vs Davy have taken place in one of the slams. You probably can't grasp the difference, but do not panic. It's quite normal, as you are rather dumb.

Oh so now slam count IS important? In case you didn't know, 16 > 9 > 0. Thanks for playing, you lose. :)

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:31 PM
Unlike you, I'm not playing. How many slams has Fed lost to Rafa? And how many slams has Rafa lost to Fed? You do the count, sport. You do the count and get back to us. Besides, everybody knows that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era (i.e. before Rafa started to get good in all surfaces.)

Tennis is not about just beating one player, it's about beating the field. Last I checked Fed has won more slams than NAdal. In fact Nadal's best year does not even come close to Fed's 3rd best year. Eat it loser.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 07:36 PM
Unlike you, I'm not playing. How many slams has Fed lost to Rafa? And how many slams has Rafa lost to Fed? You do the count, sport. You do the count and get back to us. Besides, everybody knows that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era (i.e. before Rafa started to get good in all surfaces.)

So Nadal just beat a weak era champion? That isn't impressive at all.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 07:39 PM
Unlike you, I'm not playing. How many slams has Fed lost to Rafa? And how many slams has Rafa lost to Fed? You do the count, sport. You do the count and get back to us. Besides, everybody knows that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era (i.e. before Rafa started to get good in all surfaces.)
And anyone with even a modicum amount of intelligence can tell you that this argument is circular and ends up making Nadal look like a garbage player himself.

mental midget
01-18-2011, 07:45 PM
fowler's reactions were priceless as that teeth-pulling session of an interview went on. he was borderline incredulous, like, 'you're really not going to bite on any of this, are you?' fowler basically retired from fatigue in the 4th.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 07:45 PM
Exactly. Not only that, but in order for Nadal to be pathetic, Federer needs to be even more pathetic (as he has fallen to Nadal more than enough times to prove it.)

I think you did get my point.

So basically, you think Federer and Nadal are both fairly average players?

:lol:

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 07:46 PM
Did you for a moment believe I was making a point? I'm just debunking some idiot's theory. The fact that I don't even need to make a point shows the solidity of some arguments that I am seeing getting thrown around here.
Okay, I know what you mean. There are lots of "LOLWUT?" type statements that get thrown around here on a regular basis. You will get used to them. Welcome to forums! :)

Legend of Borg
01-18-2011, 07:46 PM
It's certainly a pathetic era we're witnessing here.

Nadal and Fed are such bums.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:48 PM
That's an easy argument to make when your favourite player is pwned on a consistent basis by Rafito. LOL. I guess "the field" includes everyone but Nadal, huh? How does defeat taste, idiot?

I wouldn't know since you're to stupid to deliver any kind of defeat. But it's not an easy argument moron, it's the obvious argument. When you play tennis, you play many players, not just one. How difficult is that to understand? Oops, sorry probably quite difficult for a re-****.

Rippy
01-18-2011, 07:54 PM
No. I'm making a point by stating the diametrically opposite statement to what the truth is. I think I have already proven that if Nadal is pathetic, then Federer needs to be more pathetic. What's the exact opposite of that?

Disagree. That would only be the case if you were using H2H as the sole determinant of the superior player.



To make things simple, my point (stated in terms that even Eternally_damned might understand) is that you cannot proclaim Federer as the GOAT and simultaneously deride Nadal as an average clown.)

Agree. Insulting either Federer or Nadal just makes the other one look worse as well.


Nadal, whether you like his style or not, has achieved things that nobody else in this era could, even Federer.

He has achieved different things to Federer. Federer has also achieved things which Nadal has not.



The H2H speaks volumes, as does the fact that Nadal has achieved far more than Fed ever achieved at the same age. The 16 > 9 argument is moot. Wait until their careers are over.

So in one sense you want to compare their achievements when they were Nadal's age (ie, before their careers are over) but in another sense you want to wait until their careers are over before comparing? I don't think you're being terribly consistent there.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:55 PM
You used "stupid", "moron", and "re-****" in a single post. Congratulations, you are a genius. :)

By the way, I think you might fool the forum software by putting a hyphen in the word re-****, but I believe there are also human moderators in this forum that might not appreciate you using a term which is derogatory to handicapped people.

Suck on it, fool! :)

Well thank you, but that doesn't mean a lot coming from you. But thanks anyways.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 07:55 PM
Disagree. That would only be the case if you were using H2H as the sole determinant of the superior player.



Agree. Insulting either Federer or Nadal just makes the other one look worse as well.



He has achieved different things to Federer. Federer has also achieved things which Nadal has not.




So in one sense you want to compare their achievements when they were Nadal's age (ie, before their careers are over) but in another sense you want to wait until their careers are over before comparing? I don't think you're being terribly consistent there.

In other words he's a self-contradicting moron. Simple as that ;).

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 07:58 PM
Tennis is not about just beating one player, it's about beating the field. Last I checked Fed has won more slams than NAdal. In fact Nadal's best year does not even come close to Fed's 3rd best year. Eat it loser.

Then STFU about 2008 and 2010 then moron. BTW which year did Fed win 3 GS in a row on 3 different surfaces?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:02 PM
Then STFU about 2008 and 2010 then moron. BTW which year did Fed win 3 GS in a row on 3 different surfaces?

AO and USO are different surfaces. Wouldn't they have to be given they are on opposite sides of the earth?

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:03 PM
Nothing must be simple for you. Say, do you have a paper taped to your forehead with instructions on how to tie your shoes? HAHAHAHAHAHA

Ahahaa, nothing better to counter with so this is what you come up with? Good lord. Patheticcccccc. I'm very disappointed in you.

Sid_Vicious
01-18-2011, 08:05 PM
Then STFU about 2008 and 2010 then moron. BTW which year did Fed win 3 GS in a row on 3 different surfaces?

I wouldn't know since you're to stupid to deliver any kind of defeat. But it's not an easy argument moron, it's the obvious argument. When you play tennis, you play many players, not just one. How difficult is that to understand? Oops, sorry probably quite difficult for a re-****.

http://forum.codecall.net/attachments/lounge/1274-internet-tough-guys-inet_tough_guy.jpg

Rippy
01-18-2011, 08:08 PM
You are a sensible poster. Just to point out, regarding your last paragraph, that as time progresses things can only get better for Nadal, I'm afraid. That justifies the comparison I was making. Of course, nothing is sure. Nadal might suffer an injury that might force him to retire, and Federer (barring Eternally_damned or Aphex making a triumphant entrance in the Pro tour) might get a few extra GS titles as a result of that.

Well, yes I fully expect Nadal to add to his titles over the years. So his titles will definitely grow, but whether they will grow at a rate that will cause him to still surpass Federer in a "both when they are 30 years old" comparison is uncertain IMO.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:12 PM
AO and USO are different surfaces. Wouldn't they have to be given they are on opposite sides of the earth?

They're both regarded as HC majors in case you didn't know. That's like saying Laver won his CYGS on 4 different surfaces.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:14 PM
There both regarded as HC majors in case you didn't know. That's like saying Laver won his CYGS on 4 different surfaces.

I'd say USO and AO are very different surfaces despite both being 'called' HCs. After all it's all about speed, bounce and spin.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:15 PM
On the other hand, your great achievements and ruthlessly brilliant logic do nothing but confirm the great hopes that we all had bestowed upon you. Godspeed and press on, you might in good time become the greatest human who ever lived. The pinky of your left toe has more science, knowledge, and sense, than Newton, Shakespeare, and Kant combined. MWAHAHAHAHA

Thanks. Perhaps you might become a simple human one day? If you're lucky.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:19 PM
No. If I'm truly lucky I won't see your ugly mug in the forums for a while. That would be luck. :)

Wow yet another pathetic response. You must be a big bore in real life.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:22 PM
I'd say USO and AO are very different surfaces despite both being 'called' HCs. After all it's all about speed, bound and spin.

Yes NOW they are, not when Fed won them in the same year because it was rebound ace back then where the ball only bounces slightly higher and it was only slightly slower so you can't call them very different when they were pretty much the same thing.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:27 PM
On the other hand, you sound like a fascinating and sophisticated individual capable of entertaining young children as well as royalty. HAHAHAHAHA

Thanks again. But please, enough with the compliments. You're not that re-tarded. I'd say only 50%.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:28 PM
Yes NOW they are, not when Fed won them in the same year because it was rebound ace back then where the ball only bounces slightly higher and it was only slightly slower so you can't call them very different when they were pretty much the same thing.

I'd say doing 3 in a row twice on 3 different surfaces (albeit more similar than Nadal's 3) is better than doing it once.

paulorenzo
01-18-2011, 08:31 PM
Oh, please enlighten us on what injuries allowed Nadal to sweep three grandslams in a row?

interesting fact: federer has swept 3 grand slams in a row, twice.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:33 PM
How would you know? After all, you are an idiot. :)

That's not what you said earlier. Contradiction seems to be your moniker. Classic sign of re-tardation. Don't worry the world won't laugh at you, there are places for entities like you.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:42 PM
I'd say doing 3 in a row twice on 3 different surfaces (albeit more similar than Nadal's 3) is better than doing it once.

You're wrong and I disagree. Fed has never won 3 in a row in one year. Ever. That was my original question and you have still failed to answer it. Rafa's 3 in a row in one year was far more impressive as it was across 3 VERY different surfaces.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:43 PM
Here's a clue: Whenever I'm saying something that pleases you or portrays you in a favorable light, I'm just deriding you by making a rhetoric use of irony. Now grab a dictionary and see if you can decipher what I just said, you idiot. :)

No, I think you're too stupid to even know what irony is. Therefore you must be genuine, most re-***** are.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:44 PM
You're wrong and I disagree. Fed has never won 3 in a row in one year. Ever. That was my original question and you have still failed to answer it. Rafa's 3 in a row in one year was far more impressive as it was across 3 VERY different surfaces.

I never said he won 3 in a row in one year. I said 3 in a row. Kinda similar to the way the ***** now want to equate 4 in a row to a CYGS.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:44 PM
That's not what you said earlier. Contradiction seems to be your moniker. Classic sign of re-tardation. Don't worry the world won't laugh at you, there are places for entities like you.

You shouldn't knock on the contradiction door pal, you just said that Rafa's 2008 and 2010 was only because Fed was injured, but then you defended Fed by saying tennis is played against the field of players and not just one guy.

Just thought I'd point that out...

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:46 PM
You shouldn't knock on the contradiction door pal, you just said that Rafa's 2008 and 2010 was only because Fed was injured, but then you defended Fed by saying tennis is played against the field of players and not just one guy.

Just thought I'd point that out...

Well that's just a balancing perspective for those who claim Fed won 2 slams in 2009 because Rafa was 'out'.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:47 PM
Rest your brain, stinky. Too much thinking in one day can't be good for you.

Man you really confirmed it. You are so uncreative. Poor you. You must really hate yourself.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:48 PM
I never said he won 3 in a row in one year. I said 3 in a row. Kinda similar to the way the ***** now want to equate 4 in a row to a CYGS.

No but that wasn't the question I asked, I asked you which year did Fed win 3 GS in a row on 3 different surfaces? Why can't you answer that simple question?

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 08:52 PM
Well that's just a balancing perspective for those who claims Fed won 2 slams in 2009 because Rafa was 'out'.

LOL oh yeah! Just a balancing perspective...

You're better off admitting you're a moron, at least you won't look as stupid...

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:52 PM
No but that wasn't the question I asked, I asked you which year did Fed win 3 GS in a row on 3 different surfaces? Why can't you answer that simple question?

Well he did non-calendar year 3 in a row twice. Not in a single year. He did 3 slams in a year 3 times. Which Nadal did only once. I'd say doing that 3 times is more impressive than 3 in a row on 3 different surfaces ONCE.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:53 PM
LOL oh yeah! Just a balancing perspective...

You're better off admitting you're a moron, at least you won't look as stupid...

That doesn't even make sense.

Eternally_damned
01-18-2011, 08:56 PM
It makes perfect sense. You have to have over 20 IQ for it to make sense, however I'm afraid. Too bad for you. :)

Hmmm, ahh ok so that's why you understood it with your 30 IQ. Got it :).

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 09:03 PM
Well he did non-calendar year 3 in a row twice. Not in a single year. He did 3 slams in a year 3 times. Which Nadal did only once. I'd say doing that 3 times is more impressive than 3 in a row on 3 different surfaces ONCE.

But that wasn't your original argument now was it? You said that Rafa's best year wasn't as good as Fed's 3rd best. So you're comparing years not overall accomplishments. Obviously Fed has accomplished more, but Rafa has a longer time left given he's 5 years younger. BUT IMO Rafa's 2010 was better than any of Fed's years because it is much tougher to adjust your game over 3 GS's on 3 very different surfaces. Nobody has done that before.

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 09:05 PM
Hmmm, ahh ok so that's why you understood it with your 30 IQ. Got it :).

So you're admitting your IQ is 20 or under. I suggested that you admit you are a moron but that'll do.

piece
01-18-2011, 09:33 PM
Fed had a lung infection at the beginning of the year and leg injury during W10. Rafa won USO10 legitimately however, with a cakewalk draw. We'll see what happens when the law of averages takes over.

Law of averages...not too familiar with that one...

piece
01-18-2011, 09:43 PM
Here's a clue: Whenever I'm saying something that pleases you or portrays you in a favorable light, I'm just deriding you by making a rhetoric use of irony. Now grab a dictionary and see if you can decipher what I just said, you idiot. :)

My dictionary says the adjectival form of the word rhetoric, i.e. rhetorical would have been a better fit here. :lol:

luvly
01-18-2011, 09:57 PM
But that wasn't your original argument now was it? You said that Rafa's best year wasn't as good as Fed's 3rd best. So you're comparing years not overall accomplishments. Obviously Fed has accomplished more, but Rafa has a longer time left given he's 5 years younger. BUT IMO Rafa's 2010 was better than any of Fed's years because it is much tougher to adjust your game over 3 GS's on 3 very different surfaces. Nobody has done that before.

i hate to break it to you but in no way shape or form is rafa's 2010 better then fed's 2006. Rafa didnt matter until April and then didnt matter after September. Federer made 16 finals out of the 17 tourney's he played across all surfaces. The only event he didnt make the final he flew from winning the event before (canadian master's) to cincy and played the day after he got there. he was dominant and relevant all year long something nadal has yet to do and didnt do in 2010....

piece
01-18-2011, 10:17 PM
I ain't got no learning from books. :)

Then you'll have to forgive my insensitivity, kind sir.

Messarger
01-18-2011, 10:21 PM
Fed had a lung infection at the beginning of the year and leg injury during W10. Rafa won USO10 legitimately however, with a cakewalk draw. We'll see what happens when the law of averages takes over.

lol excuses.

Messarger
01-18-2011, 10:27 PM
Kind of makes me want to start a poll thread for Federer's malaise du jour for this year. What will it be? Inflamed toe nail? Botched nose job? Mirka-related injury? :)

maybe this time he will get injured by the law of averages:twisted:

Nadalfan89
01-18-2011, 10:27 PM
I surprised Federer isn't always injured. Such a frail man with such a powerful woman...

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 10:30 PM
i hate to break it to you but in no way shape or form is rafa's 2010 better then fed's 2006. Rafa didnt matter until April and then didnt matter after September. Federer made 16 finals out of the 17 tourney's he played across all surfaces. The only event he didnt make the final he flew from winning the event before (canadian master's) to cincy and played the day after he got there. he was dominant and relevant all year long something nadal has yet to do and didnt do in 2010....

Which 2006 clay tourny did Fed win? I don't recall him winning any at all. He lost the Masters one's and the GS to 19-20 year old Nadal. So Rafa in 2010 won 3 GS in a row on 3 very different surfaces, that has NEVER been done before in the history of tennis and is a far greater achievement than winning 2 GS on 2 very similar surfaces and one on grass as well as reaching and winning masters finals. Also the 2006 field was weaker IMO which explains the winning percentage. Credit to Fed, you still have to go out and win them and it's not like as if it was easy or anything, incredible year no doubt, just slightly not as impressive as 2010 IMO because the GS are the tourny's that matter most and to win 3 in a row on 3 very different surfaces is the better achievement because it's more difficult given the adjustments you need to make to your game to win them.

aphex
01-18-2011, 10:30 PM
Kind of makes me want to start a poll thread for Federer's malaise du jour for this year. What will it be? Inflamed toe nail? Botched nose job? Mirka-related injury? :)

You make me want to start a thread about Lone Wolves and why they keep coming back after having been banned several times...

a. obsession?
b. desperation?
c. loneliness?

piece
01-18-2011, 10:30 PM
maybe this time he will get injured by the law of averages:twisted:

Or gored by a unicorn?

piece
01-18-2011, 10:33 PM
Which 2006 clay tourny did Fed win? I don't recall him winning any at all. He lost the Masters one's and the GS to 19-20 year old Nadal. So Rafa in 2010 won 3 GS in a row on 3 very different surfaces, that has NEVER been done before in the history of tennis and is a far greater achievement than winning 2 GS on 2 very similar surfaces and one on grass as well as reaching and winning masters finals. Also the 2006 field was weaker IMO which explains the winning percentage. Credit to Fed, you still have to go out and win them and it's not like as if it was easy or anything, incredible year no doubt, just slightly not as impressive as 2010 IMO because the GS are the tourny's that matter most and to win 3 in a row on 3 very different surfaces is the better achievement because it's more difficult given the adjustments you need to make to your game to win them.

Noone has ever won 3 slams in a year and had a 92-5 win/loss record like Fed did in 2006. But who cares about such an obtuse conjunction of a statistic, right?

Point is, just because something has never been done before doesn't magically make it better than something that has. There are other criteria to satisfy.

luvly
01-18-2011, 10:36 PM
Which 2006 clay tourny did Fed win? I don't recall him winning any at all. He lost the Masters one's and the GS to 19-20 year old Nadal. So Rafa in 2010 won 3 GS in a row on 3 very different surfaces, that has NEVER been done before in the history of tennis and is a far greater achievement than winning 2 GS on 2 very similar surfaces and one on grass as well as reaching and winning masters finals. Also the 2006 field was weaker IMO which explains the winning percentage. Credit to Fed, you still have to go out and win them and it's not like as if it was easy or anything, incredible year no doubt, just slightly not as impressive as 2010 IMO because the GS are the tourny's that matter most and to win 3 in a row on 3 very different surfaces is the better achievement because it's more difficult given the adjustments you need to make to your game to win them.

the fact that you have to add an adjective to prove your point only helps to prove mine....what makes these very different surfaces different from the one's that are just different???

what events did nadal win before april? or how come he didnt win anything more relevant than tokyo (IIRC that's the asian swing tourney he won)...i will take make 2 masters final and the FO over nadal's early and late 2010 results any day.

by the way if the slams are the events that matter the most then federer's 2006 is better becuase he had better overall results plain and simple

Sharpshooter
01-18-2011, 10:54 PM
the fact that you have to add an adjective to prove your point only helps to prove mine....what makes these very different surfaces different from the one's that are just different???

what events did nadal win before april? or how come he didnt win anything more relevant than tokyo (IIRC that's the asian swing tourney he won)...i will take make 2 masters final and the FO over nadal's early and late 2010 results any day.

by the way if the slams are the events that matter the most then federer's 2006 is better becuase he had better overall results plain and simple

rebound ace and decoturf are very very similar surfaces so there is no need for a different game plan to win those, hence the reason Fed was able to win them.

However, Fed did not win ONE single clay tournament all his trophies came from HC or grass. Overall GS result is that Rafa won 3 and Fed won 3 plain and simple, only difference is Rafa won 3 in a row on 3 very different surfaces whilst Fed did not win 3 in a row and of the 3 he won, 2 were on very similar surfaces so it's not as impressive IMO.

Anyways, I'm going to leave it at that, you have your opinion and I have mine and I don't see anyone changing it, so there's no point discussing it any further.

luvly
01-18-2011, 10:59 PM
rebound ace and decoturf are very very similar surfaces so there is no need for a different game plan to win those, hence the reason Fed was able to win them.

However, Fed did not win ONE single clay tournament all his trophies came from HC or grass. Overall GS result is that Rafa won 3 and Fed won 3 plain and simple, only difference is Rafa won 3 in a row on 3 very different surfaces whilst Fed did not win 3 in a row and of the 3 he won, 2 were on very similar surfaces so it's not as impressive IMO.

Anyways, I'm going to leave it at that, you have your opinion and I have mine and I don't see anyone changing it, so there's no point discussing it any further.

leave it at that....but more and more the two natural surfaces are getting to be a like RG speeding up Wimbledon slowing down, half of the court without grass by the second week. similar styles of play etc etc etc.

Messarger
01-18-2011, 11:02 PM
leave it at that....but more and more the two natural surfaces are getting to be a like RG speeding up Wimbledon slowing down, half of the court without grass by the second week. similar styles of play etc etc etc.

Why do you suggest that clay is speeding up?

luvly
01-18-2011, 11:09 PM
Why do you suggest that clay is speeding up?

the surface didnt change but the weather made it a little faster especially in 2009

aphex
01-18-2011, 11:17 PM
You make me want to start a thread about Lone Wolves and why they keep coming back after having been banned several times...

a. obsession?
b. desperation?
c. loneliness?

You flatter me. It was a pity to see TLW banned and see you remain on the forums. One of the most brilliant posters left, and one of the most annoying and dullest remained. The world ain't fair. Then again, you already knew that, didn't you?


All three apparently...

55 posts in a day...how laughably desperate, obsessed and lonesome you must be...

poor muppet...

aphex
01-19-2011, 12:27 AM
You are my idol. Keep talking. :)

Anybody could be your idol, simple Jack...

http://www.patriciaebauer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/20080731_simple-jack.jpg

Hitman
01-19-2011, 12:59 AM
Anybody could be your idol, simple Jack...

http://www.patriciaebauer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/20080731_simple-jack.jpg

LMAO!!!!!!

I loved Tropic Thunder! :)

Gorecki
01-19-2011, 01:09 AM
You are my idol. Keep talking. :)

hopefully you will get banned faster than last time!

Turning Pro
01-19-2011, 02:55 AM
leave it at that....but more and more the two natural surfaces are getting to be a like RG speeding up Wimbledon slowing down, half of the court without grass by the second week. similar styles of play etc etc etc. sure it's the same surface, roddick always gets to the finals with his potent serve, no wait..

fed won 2 slams on his fav surface (had a 40-50 match winning streak), and of course grass (6 time winner) . nadal was more versatile winning consecutively on 3 different surfaces and once on his 'impossible to win' worst fast us open surface. also there's only 1 slam on clay.....

Jchurch
01-19-2011, 02:56 AM
LMAO!!!!!!

I loved Tropic Thunder! :)

D-D-D-D-D-D-Dooooon't hurt me lmao

svijk
01-19-2011, 03:10 AM
who is Ralph ?:)

Hitman
01-19-2011, 03:14 AM
D-D-D-D-D-D-Dooooon't hurt me lmao

http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/never_go_full_******.jpg

Messarger
01-19-2011, 03:15 AM
who is Ralph ?:)

top spin troll who cant get ban due to the 4 different type of clay courts namely red, green, deco turf, rebound ace.

aphex
01-19-2011, 03:22 AM
http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/never_go_full_******.jpg

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff171/Flipsui305/leadfarmer.jpg

Eternally_damned
01-19-2011, 11:45 AM
Not only was federer's 2006 better than nadal's 2010 by a mile. But his 2004, 2007 were also better and 2005 comes pretty darn close

Legend of Borg
01-19-2011, 12:01 PM
What happened to Jack's posts?

Did you guys chase him away again?

Naughty.... ;)


BTW, favorite scene in the whole film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMfCESMLVDk&feature=related

Epic.

Gorecki
01-20-2011, 03:12 AM
What happened to Jack's posts?

Did you guys chase him away again?

Naughty.... ;)


Epic.

jack is back (to ban town)