PDA

View Full Version : Congrats to Djokovic on his amazing streak: he won one grand slam in a row!!


tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 05:02 AM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

Magnus
06-18-2011, 05:04 AM
I was sure Murray spanked Nadal in some HC slams and Djokovic spanked Fed in some HC slams. Perhaps it was just my imagination.

jmverdugo
06-18-2011, 05:08 AM
I think you are missing the point.

tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 05:13 AM
what point am I missing?

Let's discount ALL non-grand slam matches entirely.

Djokovic has NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam and has ONLY managed to beat a Federer who is at the moment absolutely crippled by old age. And he doesn't even beat this old man all the time as evidenced by the FO.

People say that if Djokovic could get to a final with Nadal he'd win. Firstly, I dispute that: Djokovic would get his *** handed to him as he's never beaten Nadal in a slam before. Secondly, he may never even get that chance because of Federer who TWENTY NINE for godssakes, Djokovic should be routining him but at the moment can't even seem to deal with him.

blue steel
06-18-2011, 05:18 AM
sry u just dont know what you're talking about. murray is 2-0 against nadal in hardcourt slams. djokovic beat federer twice in a row at slams before losing to him at the french. both of them are better on hardcourts.

Tennis_Monk
06-18-2011, 05:34 AM
The answer is NO.

Cup8489
06-18-2011, 05:40 AM
(Djokovic reminds me of Murray, except for the Australian Open success. Djokovic beat Federer at 3 slams [AO, AO, USO]. Murray beat Rafa at 2 slams [USO, AO]. Yet both have lost on the biggest occasions - Djokovic lost a chance to prove he could win outside of Australia. Murray lost to Rafa at Wimbledon. Djokovic is a better player in non-slams than in slams. Murray is a better player in non-slams than in slams. Opposite to Rafa/Federer, both of whom are better in slams)
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01243/novak-djokovic-and_1243354c.jpg

Their games are pretty similar, relying on their defensive skills to enable them to choose the right moment to go offensive, both have extremely solid 2hbh, and shaky forehands..Both can play at net, both are 6'3"..

lol.

tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 05:52 AM
Their games are pretty similar, relying on their defensive skills to enable them to choose the right moment to go offensive, both have extremely solid 2hbh, and shaky forehands..Both can play at net, both are 6'3"..

lol.

Except Djokovic does everything about 10x better.

jones101
06-18-2011, 06:01 AM
sry u just dont know what you're talking about. murray is 2-0 against nadal in hardcourt slams.

http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/339/338535/O-RLY.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTnjCZr35NI

zagor
06-18-2011, 06:04 AM
Amazing!!

I agree,it's one of the most amazing streaks I've ever seen.Dominating peak Nadal in such a fashion is just off the charts.

Sentinel
06-18-2011, 06:06 AM
Đoković's message:

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQZdHxOIcXsvKL4VbcywatVrsBk078sP rjgdD-vSK51wqzzN6SIpA

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:17 AM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

oh geez. Another Fed/******* really perturbed by Djokovic's possible impact on his boy's legacy...

First off, slams are telling factors of success, but they aren't the only tournaments out there. If they were, why would top players care about MS 1000s?

Secondly, Federer is not "age-crippled". Is he worse due to age? Yes. Is he crippled? Not until I see him in a wheelchair would I call him crippled.

And yes, Nole is 0-5 against Rafa in slams. But don't forget that he is 0-1 on HC slams, and that was before his serve was fixed and he became the human weapon he is now. Everyone loses to Nadal at RG (Nole is 0-3 against Rafa there), Nole isn't a grass court player (Nole is 0-1 against Nadal at WC). But the last four meetings between Djoker and Nadal went Djokovic's way, even straight setting Nadal on clay.

It is naive to say that no tourneys count aside from slams.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-18-2011, 06:19 AM
This statement comes way to early

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:22 AM
what point am I missing?

Let's discount ALL non-grand slam matches entirely.

Djokovic has NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam and has ONLY managed to beat a Federer who is at the moment absolutely crippled by old age. And he doesn't even beat this old man all the time as evidenced by the FO.

And Federer only beat Nadal at a slam twice. Both were near his prime. I guess nowadays, Nadal is invincible at slams?

People say that if Djokovic could get to a final with Nadal he'd win. Firstly, I dispute that: Djokovic would get his *** handed to him as he's never beaten Nadal in a slam before. Secondly, he may never even get that chance because of Federer who TWENTY NINE for godssakes, Djokovic should be routining him but at the moment can't even seem to deal with him.


Well, Del Potro was 0-3 against Federer at slams before USO 2009. According to your logic, Federer couldn't have lost because JMDP never beat him at a slam before...

tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 06:23 AM
I agree,it's one of the most amazing streaks I've ever seen.Dominating peak Nadal in such a fashion is just off the charts.

Winning one slam in a row puts him up there with the likes of Gaudio.

And he's only dominated Nadal outside of slams so that doesn't count in any way. 5 set tennis is a completely different sport. I guarantee if the two met in FO final, he would be routined in straight sets.

Well, if he even makes the Wimby final (which is a big IF yet really shouldn't be as Federer is so old) we'll see him get routined there as well.

It speaks volumes of Djokovic's so called new level that he's not even reliably able to blast away an elderly Federer in all slams. The guy is TWENTY NINE - he's practically in a zimmer-frame yet beat Djokovic in the last slam??

Tammo
06-18-2011, 06:26 AM
sry u just dont know what you're talking about. murray is 2-0 against nadal in hardcourt slams. djokovic beat federer twice in a row at slams before losing to him at the french. both of them are better on hardcourts.

WHAT??????:shock::shock:, obviously you don't know your tennis.

tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 06:29 AM
No, it is naive to suggest that results outside of slams mean anything. Hence people get so worked up about hype-jobs such as Raonic and so-on then of course he is routined on the occasions where it actually matters and the players that actually matter step up their games.

[QUOTE=Manus Domini;5754919]And Federer only beat Nadal at a slam twice. Both were near his prime. I guess nowadays, Nadal is invincible at slams?

YES, believe me I am no Nadal fan, but he is completely invincible at every slam nowadays - and it WOULD be the biggest sporting upset of all time if he didn't win every slam until about 2014.

zagor
06-18-2011, 06:29 AM
puts him up there with the likes of Gaudio.

I wouldn't go that far,even though he was close in the 1st of Madrid Novak hasn't bageled Nadal on clay yet like Gaudio did in his day.Who knows though,we could see many more matches in the future between peak Novak and peak Nadal so it isn't out of the question that Nadal eats a bagel or a breadstick.

CocaCola
06-18-2011, 06:30 AM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i_Wx_2aBwuw/TdPClyY9UWI/AAAAAAAAAg8/0P6kY3tSuN4/s1600/evil.jpg

Ignorant and dumb thread...

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:34 AM
Winning one slam in a row puts him up there with the likes of Gaudio.

I guess Nadal was just as poor a player between 2005 and 2007. I mean, he only won the French Open for those 3 years.

And he's only dominated Nadal outside of slams so that doesn't count in any way. 5 set tennis is a completely different sport. I guarantee if the two met in FO final, he would be routined in straight sets.

If they don't count, why doesn't Nadal just first round them and save his body?

Well, if he even makes the Wimby final (which is a big IF yet really shouldn't be as Federer is so old) we'll see him get routined there as well.

Right. The slam he's worst at, he has to get to the final if he wants to be considered a half-rate player. :roll:

It speaks volumes of Djokovic's so called new level that he's not even reliably able to blast away an elderly Federer in all slams.

Federer is 29, he's not a senile old man...

The guy is TWENTY NINE - he's practically in a zimmer-frame yet beat Djokovic in the last slam??

And he took Nadal to 4 sets on clay, almost won the first set. Is Nadal that bad too?

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:35 AM
(Human weapon can't beat a 29-year-old tennis player on the 29-year-old's worst surface? Crappy human weapon I must say)

Considering it's not Djokovic's favorite surface...

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:38 AM
No, it is naive to suggest that results outside of slams mean anything. Hence people get so worked up about hype-jobs such as Raonic and so-on then of course he is routined on the occasions where it actually matters and the players that actually matter step up their games.

Pray tell, why does Nadal take on so many outside tourneys if they don't matter?

YES, believe me I am no Nadal fan, but he is completely invincible at every slam nowadays - and it WOULD be the biggest sporting upset of all time if he didn't win every slam until about 2014.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

That's exactly why Nadal lost to Ferrer at the Australian Open, because he's invincible? That's risible

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 06:44 AM
(Clay is Djokovic's 2nd favorite surface, and Federer's worst surface.

In fact, Djokovic needed a 3rd set tie-breaker to beat Rafa in Miami, and Djokovic lost the 1st set at Indian Wells to Rafa. Yet Djokovic beat Rafa in straight sets twice on clay this year)

And Federer had an amazing day. Don't forget, he almost got 2 sets of Rafa this year at RG

Macro80
06-18-2011, 07:04 AM
Lol another OP aged between 12 and 14,look at the rather rudimentary use of logic and disregard for basic grammar. Why do you guys rise to jerks like this? He's probably not even shaving yet.

Mainad
06-18-2011, 07:04 AM
It speaks volumes of Djokovic's so called new level that he's not even reliably able to blast away an elderly Federer in all slams. The guy is TWENTY NINE - he's practically in a zimmer-frame yet beat Djokovic in the last slam??

Lol..how old are you? Sixteen? Twenty-nine may be a bit mature for the average tennis player on tour these days,but it hardly makes him an 'old man on a zimmer'.Federer is still amazingly fit,if a little slower,and can still mix it with the best.That's why he is a solid no.3 and still has ambitions to get back to no.1.You talk as if he's ninety-nine,not twenty-nine!


YES, believe me I am no Nadal fan, but he is completely invincible at every slam nowadays - and it WOULD be the biggest sporting upset of all time if he didn't win every slam until about 2014.

It looks like you're going to be easily upset! He didn't even win every slam THIS year,nor LAST year (when he was playing even better) so what makes you think he's going to win every one from now until 2014 or do you think he's going to be even better by the time he's an 'old man of TWENTY-EIGHT' than he has been so far?

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 07:26 AM
[QUOTE=BULLZ1LLA;5754969]Federer is a great claycourt player, and he played better in this RG than perhaps all others that he played in the past./QUOTE]

Didn't you say before that Djokovic should have beaten Fed because RG is Fed's worst surface?

Yet, here you are claiming Fed played his best RG ever.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-18-2011, 07:32 AM
(Clay is Djokovic's 2nd favorite surface, and Federer's worst surface.

In fact, Djokovic needed a 3rd set tie-breaker to beat Rafa in Miami, and Djokovic lost the 1st set at Indian Wells to Rafa. Yet Djokovic beat Rafa in straight sets twice on clay this year)

Are you actually defending the great man from Switzerland or just thrashing Djokovic?

AM95
06-18-2011, 07:38 AM
lol. OP sounds like an angry *******

8PAQ
06-18-2011, 07:42 AM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

Nadal is 0-4 against the King. Would have been 0-5 if the GOAT didn't stop the King in the FO semi.

8PAQ
06-18-2011, 07:45 AM
Lol another OP aged between 12 and 14,look at the rather rudimentary use of logic and disregard for basic grammar. Why do you guys rise to jerks like this? He's probably not even shaving yet.

At least he is not putting every post in () like tool or keep posting pictures of aging overweight ugly actors from India.

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 07:45 AM
lol. OP sounds like an angry *******

The OP does realize that for 4 years, Nadal had 1 slam win streaks too, right? 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009.

tennis_fan_182
06-18-2011, 07:50 AM
Nadal is 0-4 against the King. Would have been 0-5 if the GOAT didn't stop the King in the FO semi.

I thought Djokovic was 0-5 against Nadal in SLAMS ie. the only matches that matter.

I'm not remotely a Nadal fan - just a realistic tennis fan.

And realistically, to suggest that Nadal will not win this years Wimby, and this years US Open, and every slam for the next couple years at least is just clutching at straws.

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 07:51 AM
(Great man? You mean great tennis player. And he is a great tennis player, only the 3rd player ever to make 5 Roland Garros Finals)

Ok, hold on. I'm confused.

First you say Djokovic should've thrashed Fed at RG because it's Fed's worst surface.

Then you claim that Fed played better this year than ever at RG

Then you claim Fed is one of the best CCers of all time.

what kinda logic is that?

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-18-2011, 07:52 AM
Stop the Djokovic bashing already!! He raped Nadal 4 times in a row and made Nadal look like a droopy-eyed armless child.
If Novak plays Nadal in Wimby, i would bet my money on Novak-lots of money!

Manus Domini
06-18-2011, 07:54 AM
I thought Djokovic was 0-5 against Nadal in SLAMS ie. the only matches that matter.

If they are all that matter, then Rosewall's the undeniable GOAT...

I'm not remotely a Nadal fan - just a realistic tennis fan.

Just because you don't have tennis channel doesn't mean you should cry over missing other important matches.

Remember, some of the matches called "the greatest ever" were played outside of slams. 1937 Davis Cup (imagine that, a Davis Cup match is one of history's finest!) for example. I doubt anyone would say that match didn't matter, when Hitler practically threatened his player's life.

And realistically, to suggest that Nadal will not win this years Wimby, and this years US Open, and every slam for the next couple years at least is just clutching at straws.

You're a loon. Nadal won't win this year's USO. Donald Young will.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
06-18-2011, 07:55 AM
(Great man? You mean great tennis player. And he is a great tennis player, only the 3rd player ever to make 5 Roland Garros Finals)

And the ONLY one with 5 or MORE finals in EVERY GS, impressive huh?

The-Champ
06-18-2011, 07:56 AM
Nadal is 0-4 against the King. Would have been 0-5 if the GOAT didn't stop the King in the FO semi.

Nadal is 16-11 against the serb. Get your facts straight, or did you start watching tennis this year?

TheOneHander
06-18-2011, 08:01 AM
Nadal is 16-11 against the serb. Get your facts straight, or did you start watching tennis this year?

He was talking about this year alone.

jmverdugo
06-18-2011, 08:39 AM
what point am I missing?

Let's discount ALL non-grand slam matches entirely.

Djokovic has NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam and has ONLY managed to beat a Federer who is at the moment absolutely crippled by old age. And he doesn't even beat this old man all the time as evidenced by the FO.

People say that if Djokovic could get to a final with Nadal he'd win. Firstly, I dispute that: Djokovic would get his *** handed to him as he's never beaten Nadal in a slam before. Secondly, he may never even get that chance because of Federer who TWENTY NINE for godssakes, Djokovic should be routining him but at the moment can't even seem to deal with him.

Sorry, I was trying to point out that the thread is pointless... :)

Gorecki
06-18-2011, 08:43 AM
Nadal is 16-11 against the serb. Get your facts straight, or did you start watching tennis this year?

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm24/lambfreack/iamhrbatysbeachno.jpg

Sentinel
06-18-2011, 09:12 AM
At least he is not putting every post in () like tool or keep posting pictures of aging overweight ugly actors from India.
haha, ksbh getting lotsa attention ! I believe the more people protest, the more he will post. ksbh himself is aging and overweight (and most likely ugly too :D )

Fedex
06-18-2011, 09:23 AM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

what point am I missing?

Let's discount ALL non-grand slam matches entirely.

Djokovic has NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam and has ONLY managed to beat a Federer who is at the moment absolutely crippled by old age. And he doesn't even beat this old man all the time as evidenced by the FO.

People say that if Djokovic could get to a final with Nadal he'd win. Firstly, I dispute that: Djokovic would get his *** handed to him as he's never beaten Nadal in a slam before. Secondly, he may never even get that chance because of Federer who TWENTY NINE for godssakes, Djokovic should be routining him but at the moment can't even seem to deal with him.

You are funny. Really really funny.
Keep me laughing. Thanks for the entertainment.

Sneezy
06-18-2011, 10:02 AM
If only Djokovic had this streak during the Summer Slam Season.

kishnabe
06-18-2011, 12:36 PM
And the ONLY one with 5 or MORE finals in EVERY GS, impressive huh?

Not even Nadal can touch that! Defintly at RG and Wimbledon but not the HC slams!

Tony48
06-18-2011, 12:54 PM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

Change your name. It's an insult to actual fans.

Six.One.Tour.90FAN
06-18-2011, 12:58 PM
what point am I missing?

Let's discount ALL non-grand slam matches entirely.

Djokovic has NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam and has ONLY managed to beat a Federer who is at the moment absolutely crippled by old age. And he doesn't even beat this old man all the time as evidenced by the FO.

People say that if Djokovic could get to a final with Nadal he'd win. Firstly, I dispute that: Djokovic would get his *** handed to him as he's never beaten Nadal in a slam before. Secondly, he may never even get that chance because of Federer who TWENTY NINE for godssakes, Djokovic should be routining him but at the moment can't even seem to deal with him.

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/1/20/129085017794048858.jpg

90

FlamEnemY
06-18-2011, 01:56 PM
http://petnewsandviews.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/bunny2.jpg

The-Champ
06-18-2011, 04:17 PM
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm24/lambfreack/iamhrbatysbeachno.jpg


so what? DH owns rafa, that's the truth and so does Davydenko. anything else? you are bitter as always.

Gorecki
06-21-2011, 01:14 AM
so what? DH owns rafa, that's the truth and so does Davydenko. anything else? you are bitter as always.

funny that you keep acusing me of being bitter where it's you who calls Serbs "Balkan Trash" not to mention several other racist remarks... and yet i'm the bitter one!!! rrrrrigggghhhhhtttt....

Towser83
06-21-2011, 03:50 PM
This is stupid. First the idea that Djokovic couldn't win because he never has won a slam meeting with Nadal before. Using that logic, nothing would ever happen at all. Everything has a first time. Before this year Djokovic hadn't beaten Nadal in a final or on clay. Now he's done the first, 4 times and the second twice.

Nadal didn't play great at the French Open. He looked below his best, only he had in the final a guy even more below his best. Federer is still capable of playing great but he doesn't have the consistancy to trouble beat Nadal at RG. If he was as consistant as he was in 2006, then maybe against the under par Nadal we wittnessed yes. Djokovic in prime form could have definitely won, because nadal was not as clinical as previous years and really gave Federer chances to get back into the match. Djoko would have taken them if he was playing the way he has been most of the year.

Secondly, Federer is past his best but he can have flashes of form. He's not in a zimmer frame because he's 29.

Didn't a 31 year old Agassi beat Federer at the US Open in 2001 - 6-1 6-2 6-4?

tennis_fan_182
06-21-2011, 04:01 PM
This is stupid. First the idea that Djokovic couldn't win because he never has won a slam meeting with Nadal before. Using that logic, nothing would ever happen at all. Everything has a first time. Before this year Djokovic hadn't beaten Nadal in a final or on clay. Now he's done the first, 4 times and the second twice.

Nadal didn't play great at the French Open. He looked below his best, only he had in the final a guy even more below his best. Federer is still capable of playing great but he doesn't have the consistancy to trouble beat Nadal at RG. If he was as consistant as he was in 2006, then maybe against the under par Nadal we wittnessed yes. Djokovic in prime form could have definitely won, because nadal was not as clinical as previous years and really gave Federer chances to get back into the match. Djoko would have taken them if he was playing the way he has been most of the year.

Secondly, Federer is past his best but he can have flashes of form. He's not in a zimmer frame because he's 29.

Didn't a 31 year old Agassi beat Federer at the US Open in 2001 - 6-1 6-2 6-4?

Yeh, way to go with that hippie ideology. Insurance companies base their premiums solely on past records. History repeats itself. You can't change who you are.

Best example is Murray. He is a born loser, so it doesn't matter how cakewalk of a draw he is given - he WILL find a way to lose.

But other than that, Djokovic has always been Nadal's pigeon in a slam and Nadal just needs to show up to win.

Towser83
06-21-2011, 04:14 PM
Yeh, way to go with that hippie ideology. Insurance companies base their premiums solely on past records. History repeats itself. You can't change who you are.

Best example is Murray. He is a born loser, so it doesn't matter how cakewalk of a draw he is given - he WILL find a way to lose.

But other than that, Djokovic has always been Nadal's pigeon in a slam and Nadal just needs to show up to win.

It's not Hippie idealogy, it's fact.

This is nothing to do with changing who you are.

I repeat, Djokovic had never beaten Nadal in any final. Ever. He was his pidgeon in finals. So he should have lost the last 4 finals they played, right? News for you, he didn't. He never beat Nadal on clay. Should have lost. He didn't.

In 2006 Federer had never lost a slam final. At the Frech Open...he lost.

Soderling never beat Federer at a slam in 4 attempts at a slam, but that didn't matter at last years RG did it?

Murray lost the first 2 slam meetings to Nadal but then beat him. If Murray can beat Nadal in a slam, Djokovic can.

Your idea that you only have to turn up is laughable. I suppose you pray to gods and sacrifice cattle, and believe it's written in the stars, and not actually decided by 2 men on a tennis court.

You see insurance companies sometimes have to pay out. :)

tennis_fan_182
06-21-2011, 04:26 PM
It's not Hippie idealogy, it's fact.

This is nothing to do with changing who you are.

I repeat, Djokovic had never beaten Nadal in any final. Ever. He was his pidgeon in finals. So he should have lost the last 4 finals they played, right? News for you, he didn't. He never beat Nadal on clay. Should have lost. He didn't.

In 2006 Federer had never lost a slam final. At the Frech Open...he lost.

Soderling never beat Federer at a slam in 4 attempts at a slam, but that didn't matter at last years RG did it?

Murray lost the first 2 slam meetings to Nadal but then beat him. If Murray can beat Nadal in a slam, Djokovic can.

Your idea that you only have to turn up is laughable. I suppose you pray to gods and sacrifice cattle, and believe it's written in the stars, and not actually decided by 2 men on a tennis court.

You see insurance companies sometimes have to pay out. :)

Dude, just go with the majority stat - it would make your life easier if you stopped trying to be quirky.

Nadal ranked no. 1. Djokovic ranked no. 2. Therefore, when no. 1 plays no. 2, no. 1 WINS!! It's that simple.

Or, if you're a gambling man, who is odds on favorite for Wimbledon? And this years US Open? And next year's Australian? And next year's French? And Wimbledon? And so on?

Nadal.

That's right, so you're an idiot if you think someone other than Nadal will win those as it implies you think you know better than those whose JOB it is to sit around and use various mathematical formulas to conclude who the winner of those tournaments will be.

Towser83
06-21-2011, 04:32 PM
Dude, just go with the majority stat - it would make your life easier if you stopped trying to be quirky.

Nadal ranked no. 1. Djokovic ranked no. 2. Therefore, when no. 1 plays no. 2, no. 1 WINS!! It's that simple.

Or, if you're a gambling man, who is odds on favorite for Wimbledon? And this years US Open? And next year's Australian? And next year's French? And Wimbledon? And so on?

Nadal.

That's right, so you're an idiot if you think someone other than Nadal will win those as it implies you think you know better than those whose JOB it is to sit around and use various mathematical formulas to conclude who the winner of those tournaments will be.

How many times did Number 2 Nadal beat Number 1 Federer?

Oh yeah say Nadal get's injured and pulls out sometime before the final, he will be number 2 and Djokovic number 1. Obviously then Djokovic will win all further matches?

Is it your job to be an moron? You're doing it well. You deserve a payrise.

Ballbashing Grinder
06-21-2011, 07:22 PM
Well, at least it contains a Slam unlike McEnroe's record and had Tipsarevic and Fognini not pulled out during the run, he would have passed Mac's start of the season record, which he deserved to do tbh, given he would have won both of those comfortably bar a minor miracle. Also to those comparing Murray/Nadal GS matches to Djokovic/Fed, I think Djokovic's wins are more impressive. Prior to 2010 Nadal has notoriously played rubbish(for his standards) at the USO, 2008 being no different imo. Just the previous year he lost to Ferrer, and a few other lesser players in the years before that. I thought he played very poor in that 08 semi too, very defensive and weary( any of the top players will beat him in that sort of mood). AO 10 he retired injured. Maybe it's just me but I found Djok's wins over Fed in GS's a bit more impressive.

Tony48
07-03-2011, 09:58 AM
Amazing!!

Now he will go back to being the solid, unremarkable spiritual no. 3 and Nadal's whipping boy in grand slam matches. Hell, maybe even Feds whipping boy before Fed retires.

Let him try as hard as he wants in lower level tournaments including masters - we all know they have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on grand slam matches. And we all know that grand slams are ALL that counts in tennis.

Murray beats Fedal quite routinely in masters matches, but come grand slam time, the latter two just turn it up to a level he simply doesn't have and he gets spanked. Though Djokovic is infinitely better than Murray - he doesn't have that level either. Hence in slams he can only beat an age-crippled Fed and not even consistently.

I would be surprised if he ended his career with more than 2 slams.

Quoted for posterity :)

Gorecki
07-03-2011, 10:02 AM
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/Graphics/173-0818225834-pie_in_face_2759_61182_poll_xlarge.jpg

stingstang
07-03-2011, 10:05 AM
LOL gotta love these fail topics.

Tony48
10-01-2011, 10:19 PM
Gonna bump this thread every time Novak wins a slam :)

Achilles82
10-01-2011, 10:22 PM
ahaahahahhaahahaha

ledwix
10-01-2011, 10:24 PM
Haha Djokovic, what a noob. Number one in the world by far and a mere 4-slam wonder.

gregor.b
10-01-2011, 10:28 PM
Haha Djokovic, what a noob. Number one in the world by far and a mere 4-slam wonder.

So far so good.I wonder if tennis players ever peak then start to decline?

Towser83
10-02-2011, 09:16 AM
.

Nadal ranked no. 1. Djokovic ranked no. 2. Therefore, when no. 1 plays no. 2, no. 1 WINS!! It's that simple.

Or, if you're a gambling man, who is odds on favorite for Wimbledon? And this years US Open? And next year's Australian? And next year's French? And Wimbledon? And so on?

Nadal.

That's right, so you're an idiot if you think someone other than Nadal will win those as it implies you think you know better than those whose JOB it is to sit around and use various mathematical formulas to conclude who the winner of those tournaments will be.


this crazy cat was trying to joke and be funny. At least I hope so...

Tony48
02-03-2012, 05:47 AM
LOL, 1 slam in a row.

lidoazndiabloboi
02-03-2012, 09:22 AM
EPIC FAIL by the op

Cup8489
02-03-2012, 10:32 PM
1 slam in a row... in 2012.