PDA

View Full Version : Will Nadal have any rival to challenge him?


joy
03-17-2006, 08:47 PM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.

archangelkc
03-17-2006, 08:54 PM
okay. nadal is good, but he clearly doesn't dominate the game to the level you are talking about. The guy has won 1 grand slam. Federer won all the rest. Nadal has not yet proved that he is more dominate than federer. Federer is by far the most dominate and last I checked still the top player in the world by a long shot. Nadal has a way to go before being put above Federer. I like nadal tons better than federer, but nadal hasn't done enough yet the be called more dominate.

nocab
03-17-2006, 08:58 PM
maybe we should pause this discussion until after nadal plays blake, thats going to be alot closer matchup then you may think

Virtuous
03-17-2006, 09:14 PM
he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles
Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.
o...k. Get some sleep

KickServer
03-17-2006, 09:34 PM
LOL. This guy is joking, right????

TheSneakerologist
03-17-2006, 09:44 PM
your full of crap lmao. Fed is god, you must be referring to him right? nadals gonna run outta gas or get injured so take that into account within the 40 slams buddy

VamosRafa
03-17-2006, 10:06 PM
This thread is just a joke, I'm sure.

hyperwarrior
03-17-2006, 10:12 PM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.

Don't be surprise if the rate of your thread is terrible.

quest01
03-17-2006, 10:18 PM
First of all you have to surpass 14 grand slam victories by Pete Sampras. That alone will be hard for any player to achieve.

Fumoffu
03-17-2006, 10:59 PM
don't feed the troll, guys >_>

joy
03-17-2006, 11:41 PM
No guys, This thread is not a joke. I am very serious. May be Federer can beat all the other guys but can never beat Nadal. If you have doubt, just wait and see. But Nadal can beat all, anyone and everyone. At present, there is no one who has the ability to give him any trouble. This is the obvious fact and it is very much proved in the results. You may go by the ranking points to assert your claim that Federer is more dominant. But that points will completely reverse in quite a few days. Federer wont be no 1 for long since he cannot beat Nadal. Nadal will win everything, beat Federer on every occassion and therefore rise to no 1 and Federer will slip to no 2. Nadal's presence will psycologically upset Federer and he will only get fed up, frustated and demoralised more and more because of his inability to overcome Nadal (mental obstacle). So his game will slip further and his ranking too. He will meet the same fate as Hewitt and Courier. So simple logic, it's clear who is more dominant. And then even in future there does not appear to be anyone who can take on Nadal face to face. Do you think anyone can? Fellow youngsters (Gasquet, Monfils, Young etc) are too inconsistent and also they do not have the game to trouble Nadal in anyway. This fact is pretty obvious. So, I don't see Nadal losing anything atleast in the next 10 years. In fact, you can't have a game plan against him. He is extraordinary. In the next 15 years, he would compete atleast 15*4 = 60 grand slams of which in the worst case he would win atleast 50% of it i.e. 30 at the minimum. So my logic is correct and I have proved it. Everybody says Nadal wont win this and that but he proves everyone wrong. You guys said he would lose to Baghdatis, but what happened? He ripped Baghdatis apart. Now you would say he would lose to blake and it's obvious what's going to happen. Then, same with Federer and the same outcome. IMHO, Nadal is the greatest player in history by a long long way. There is no contest here. I speak my heart out and not a joke.

slice bh compliment
03-18-2006, 04:46 AM
No guys, This thread is not a joke. I am very serious. May be Federer can beat all the other guys but can never beat Nadal. If you have doubt, just wait and see. But Nadal can beat all, anyone and everyone. At present, there is no one who has the ability to give him any trouble. ....IMHO, Nadal is the greatest player in history by a long long way. There is no contest here. I speak my heart out and not a joke.

YEah. His only real opponent is history. And history is his only opponent.

Rod Laver's a total chump in the presence of Rafa.
Bjorn Borg's 6 Slams at Roland and 5 at the All England Club: nothing compared to Rafa.
Edberg, Mac, Sampras? One-trick ponies. Glorified Rafters and Stichs.
Boris? Undedicated. Not a fighter. Not worthy of the same paragraph as Rafa.
Agassi winning all four Slams: a blip on Rafa's screen.
Budge, Tilden, Kramer, Perry, Gonzales? They bow before Rafa's greatness.
Lendl, Borg, Vilas, Muster, Bruguera, Kuerten? After watching Rafa, they finally understand how to compete on clay!!
Yannick Noah and Jim Courier? Lacking in charisma compared to the wonderful Rafa Nadal.

;)

Okay joy, we appreciate and admire your enthusiasm. People like VamosRafa or Uncle Toni (Nadal)...or Rafa himself would love to read your words. But don't you think even THEY would consider them a little premature?

wilsonplayer
03-18-2006, 04:57 AM
you can't use simple math to find out how many grand slams a player will win, because it will never work out. that's the beauty of tennis, anybody in the top say 75-50 can win against anybody. so, you can't say 15*4=60/2= 30.

equinox
03-18-2006, 06:01 AM
Nadal will spend more time out of the game injured than winning tournaments. He'll win a few french opens and maybe one hardcourt slam.
He'll hold number #1 ranking for a few weeks or month at a time.
Injuries from the tough demanding style of game he plays will cut his career short by serveral years.
That's my prediction.

tlm
03-18-2006, 06:52 AM
I agree nadal will be #1 but lets not go crazy with these wild predictions.First of all nadal has one grand slam but thats at the age of 19,guess how many slams fed won at that age, thats right none.As far as all these injury predictions that is just what all the fed fans are hoping for because they know what is coming.As far as injurys go all players get hurt the only thing nadal has to do is cut back how much he plays.Nadal is in better shape than any other player,as far as his style leading to injurys, it looks like the opposing players will get more injurys trying to stay with him.I agree that blake might give him trouble,i think right now blake has a better chance than fed.Nadal is the best player out there right now, i dont care what all you fed fans say.I remember hearing nadal could only win on clay,then bags was going to beat him last night,ya that was a helluva match wasnt it.Nadal kicked his butt all over the court.The one thing all you fed fans have to explain to me is if fed is the god then how could nadal beat him 3 out of 4.Do that math, you boys better get used to the number 2 word because that is were your boy fed the god is headed.Fed is a great player but he has been lucky the mens field has been weak,his run is over!!

atatu
03-18-2006, 07:02 AM
I'm not a Federer fan, but I can tell you Nadal will not win Wimbledon as long as Federer is around.

tlm
03-18-2006, 07:19 AM
You are right nadal most likely will not win at wimbly,who cares grass is for cows not tennis.But i do recall hearing nadal will only win on clay in the past.

Rickson
03-18-2006, 07:26 AM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.
Nadal gets beaten on a regular basis on hard courts so I don't know what you're talking about. Nadal is tough on clay, but to say he has no challenge, is a ridiculous statement. Federer is the one to beat right now because he's good on every surface. Rafa on the other hand, has proven to be tough on clay, is getting better but certainly not unbeatable on hard courts, and is weak on grass. Please don't make Rafael Nadal to be more than he is. Rafa is good, but you're making seem invincible on any surface and everybody knows that's not the case.

dozu
03-18-2006, 10:29 AM
the original post is not even good enough for an onion.com article..... my only concern for Nadal is that the game is too much of grind... these type of players may seem to be invincible (Courier, Change, Muster), but usually their dominance may not last long because it takes too much out of their body... Nadal just had an injury that sidelined him for a couple of months, if he keeps up this style of play, I bet my house that he won't last past age 25.... meaning that he has 6 years of prime left, in which he may have 50% chance of winning the French, 0% of Wimbledon, 20% of USO (which is generous) and 30% of Aussie, that would give him 6 more slams by the time he burns out.

looking at the history of this game, the players with Agassi-like longevity plays a baseline game that controls the center of the court and stand close to the baseline..... the way Nadal plays, the mileage quickly addes up on the odometer and wear/tear will show up someday for sure.

D-man
03-18-2006, 05:20 PM
nadal jus got a spankin

idle_fire
03-18-2006, 05:29 PM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.

I'm sure this is a joke/ridiculous thread and this guy new in tennis.
Did you see Blake when he beat Nadal, eh???

strongman
03-18-2006, 05:44 PM
Joy: Blake has just sent Nadal home again... Sorry Nadal fans

EclipseRydr97
03-18-2006, 08:05 PM
Way to go Blake!

SonicSpeed
03-19-2006, 01:48 AM
Now you would say he would lose to blake and it's obvious what's going to happen.

Oh, it was obvious to you that Blake was going to beat Nadal? ;)

TheNatural
03-19-2006, 05:21 AM
Word is out that Rafa lost to Blake because he had a sore big toe. His modesty prevented himform announcing this publicly.

edberg505
03-19-2006, 06:41 AM
Word is out that Rafa lost to Blake because he had a sore big toe. His modesty prevented himform announcing this publicly.

Of course he did. Did he have the same sore big toe at the US Open?

tlm
03-19-2006, 06:54 AM
I love the big celebration over blake beating nadal,all the fed fans are so happy because they did not want to see nadal beat fed again.Some will even lie + say they wanted nadal in finals but we know that is not true.Again nadal is only 19 you are seeing just a preview of things to come.Who did fed play in semis shitsephan what a joke another easy draw for fed.The only good player he beat in this event was lubi. Fed is overrated.He is good but he benefits from weak mens field.I laugh when i hear him compared to samprass,please spare me samprass had much tougher competition.Fed is king of beating the hacks.

aero_pro
03-19-2006, 06:56 AM
I dont dislike Nadal, but I am happy James Blake won. He has improved so much and I am glad he is in the top 10. He fully deserves it. Anyway shame for Nadal, but I have a feeling he will have a better run in Miami.

Breaker
03-19-2006, 07:08 AM
I agree nadal will be #1 but lets not go crazy with these wild predictions.First of all nadal has one grand slam but thats at the age of 19,guess how many slams fed won at that age, thats right none.As far as all these injury predictions that is just what all the fed fans are hoping for because they know what is coming.As far as injurys go all players get hurt the only thing nadal has to do is cut back how much he plays.Nadal is in better shape than any other player,as far as his style leading to injurys, it looks like the opposing players will get more injurys trying to stay with him.I agree that blake might give him trouble,i think right now blake has a better chance than fed.Nadal is the best player out there right now, i dont care what all you fed fans say.I remember hearing nadal could only win on clay,then bags was going to beat him last night,ya that was a helluva match wasnt it.Nadal kicked his butt all over the court.The one thing all you fed fans have to explain to me is if fed is the god then how could nadal beat him 3 out of 4.Do that math, you boys better get used to the number 2 word because that is were your boy fed the god is headed.Fed is a great player but he has been lucky the mens field has been weak,his run is over!!

Yes that explains why Fed is nearly 3000 points ahead of Nadal in the race because Fed's just that terrible..

edberg505
03-19-2006, 07:09 AM
I love the big celebration over blake beating nadal,all the fed fans are so happy because they did not want to see nadal beat fed again.Some will even lie + say they wanted nadal in finals but we know that is not true.Again nadal is only 19 you are seeing just a preview of things to come.Who did fed play in semis shitsephan what a joke another easy draw for fed.The only good player he beat in this event was lubi. Fed is overrated.He is good but he benefits from weak mens field.I laugh when i hear him compared to samprass,please spare me samprass had much tougher competition.Fed is king of beating the hacks.

Are you kidding me? One day Nadal is the next best thing since sliced bread and the next day he's just a kid and only 19. You can't have your cake and eat it too. When he wins he's Borg's successor but when he loses he's just a kid. I actually had little doubt that James would beat him. And as for the weak draws, are you kidding me? Dude, if Nadal has Sebastien Grosjean in his side of the draw one more freakin time I'm gonna puke. Fed without a dobut had the tougher side of the draw with Safin, Nalbandian, Ljubicic, it's not his fault that the guys didn't make it far enough in the draw to play him. I can bet you this, Nadal is probably on a plane headed to Miami right now praying to the gods that James Blake isn't on his side of the draw again.

slice bh compliment
03-19-2006, 08:15 AM
I think he wants another crack at Blake on hardcourts.
Badly.
Just like Roger wants another shot at Rafa before the clay season begins.
Seriously.

edberg505
03-19-2006, 08:53 AM
I think he wants another crack at Blake on hardcourts.
Badly.
Just like Roger wants another shot at Rafa before the clay season begins.
Seriously.

Nadal, just doesn't have anything that can hurt Blake. Maybe before Blake worked on his backhand yeah. But right now. I just can't see it. Maybe if Blake has an off day.

tlm
03-20-2006, 05:54 AM
Ya 3000 points big deal,when another player beats you 3 out of 4 times do you go around saying you are still the better player? I never said fed was terrible,fed is a great player + its not his fault the mens field is weak.That is just the way it is,you fed fans just cant see that.Let me see fed had tougher draw even though he only played one of the 3 players you mentioned.

Brettolius
03-20-2006, 07:56 AM
Ya 3000 points big deal,when another player beats you 3 out of 4 times do you go around saying you are still the better player? I never said fed was terrible,fed is a great player + its not his fault the mens field is weak.That is just the way it is,you fed fans just cant see that.Let me see fed had tougher draw even though he only played one of the 3 players you mentioned.

It's funny how Nadal can't always make it past that "weak field" to even take a crack at Federer. And from what I can tell, the Nadal fans better pray the don't play each other more often. Fed will figure him out, and that's all she wrote. Did you see first set a few weeks ago, Nadal v Fed? When Fed is on attacking like that, even the speedy Nadal is helpless. It will all come together soon, and Nadal will stay put at no. 2.

tlm
03-20-2006, 08:38 AM
Did you see the first set+ the second+the third.Why didnt your boy keep attacking if it worked so good,because nadal passed him so many times fed had to stop coming to the net.Thats when fed had to go back to the baseline game were he can not hang with nadal.That is why he went to the net so much,nadal will eat him up in baseline rallys.I think its the fed fans that are doing the praying that fed doesnt have to play nadal.Funny after blake beat nadal there sure was a lot of celebration on this site,Oh thats right that was because they were so happy for blake,ha ha .

Brettolius
03-20-2006, 09:45 AM
Did you see the first set+ the second+the third.Why didnt your boy keep attacking if it worked so good,because nadal passed him so many times fed had to stop coming to the net.Thats when fed had to go back to the baseline game were he can not hang with nadal.That is why he went to the net so much,nadal will eat him up in baseline rallys.I think its the fed fans that are doing the praying that fed doesnt have to play nadal.Funny after blake beat nadal there sure was a lot of celebration on this site,Oh thats right that was because they were so happy for blake,ha ha .

How come all the masters series Nadal won last year were ones in which Fed didn't play, save 1 I think? How come Nadal can't make the final to even play Fed, especially in this weak field? Pull your head outta your arse, there's no question who's the better player. This isn't ice skating, it isn't subjective, that's why there are stats and rankings and whatnot.

tlm
03-20-2006, 10:09 AM
Ya i know nadal beats fed 3out of 4 times but fed is much better.Pull yor head out of your arse.If he is so much better then why doesnt he beat him everytime.You fed fans always have to talk about total points or fed wasnt there when nadal won the master series, who cares your the one referring to stats + rankings.I have played sports all my life+ when it comes to saying whos better or what team is better nothing determines it better than head to head competition.3 wins to 1 loss seems pretty obvious.You fed fans always seem to avoid this fact, that is why you have to change the subject to rankings or something else.Just please explain how someone so superior loses 3 out of 4 times.Let me see fed wasnt feeling good,the surface was not right or some other bs excuse.Just let me know when fed has the upper hand in head to head competition, then i will say fed is better. Because that is what really tells the truth of who is better.

doriancito
03-20-2006, 10:58 AM
the onyl reason why blake beat him was because blake entered a really really high timing nadal couldnt could catch up with, hopefully you guys noticed it too

The tennis guy
03-20-2006, 11:20 AM
I have played sports all my life+ when it comes to saying whos better or what team is better nothing determines it better than head to head competition.

You sure sound like you don't know anything about sports. The person who wins gold medal or championship is considered the best regardless whether he lost to someone earlier in the competition or not.

The tennis guy
03-20-2006, 11:26 AM
Just let me know when fed has the upper hand in head to head competition, then i will say fed is better. Because that is what really tells the truth of who is better.
Follow your logic, you think James Blake is overall better player than Nadal because he has a 2-0 record against Nadal? Krajicek is a better player than Sampras because his 6-4 record against Sampras?

You are the one who should pull your moron head out of your dumb ***!

slice bh compliment
03-20-2006, 11:31 AM
Rankings and records aside, in an individual sport it's all about match-ups. So funny how we tennis dorks argue over this kind of stuff, when it is one of the coolest elements of tennis (and boxing).

I'm looking forward to Nadal's next matches with Baghdatis, Blake, Hewitt and especially Fedi.

pianeon
03-20-2006, 11:59 AM
I have played sports all my life

I'm sure there are guys on this board who have played sports longer than 13 years.

Saito
03-20-2006, 12:23 PM
the onyl reason why blake beat him was because blake entered a really really high timing nadal couldnt could catch up with, hopefully you guys noticed it too


Still beat him though, right?

Bichigo
03-20-2006, 12:27 PM
Jimmy Connors laugh in his face..

slice bh compliment
03-20-2006, 02:11 PM
Damn straight. Jimmy would laugh at Rafa. Then he'd have his *** handed to him...likely 2 and 0 in less than an hour.

Moose Malloy
03-20-2006, 02:21 PM
Not if Rafa had to play with a T-2000, Connors would win 2 & 0. And Nadal would be in tears from Connors calling him a ****sucker on every changeover(these modern players seem very sensitive, always crying, etc)

slice bh compliment
03-20-2006, 02:37 PM
Not if Rafa had to play with a T-2000, Connors would win 2 & 0. And Nadal would be in tears from Connors calling him a ****sucker on every changeover....

Right on, Moose. And put a pair of the crappiest old Converse Jimmy Connors shoes on the kid (two or three blowouts per set!)....and a pair of piratas on ol' Jimbo.

Dear threadstarter,
It is official. We have found a rival for Rafa!:rolleyes:

tlm
03-20-2006, 02:59 PM
Hey tennis guy kiss my *** you jackoff,now you want to talk about gold medals+ whatever.Still cant explain why fed the god cant handle nadal.You+ some of the other fed groupies start your personal attacks because not everybody agrees with you.I guess that is what you have to do because its hard to argue nadal 3 fed 1.

OkStateFan
03-20-2006, 03:31 PM
lol you never answered his point about blake and Nadal, and dont pull this fed fans crap bcuz im not really a fed fan, according to ur logic blake's a better player than ur boy nadal. Tennis guy nailed it by saying ur logic was MORONIC, and besides if u dont have an answer to back up ur dumb statements dont go attacking ppl calling him a jack-off. He's right ur wrong. its that simple and lol as soon as you read this ull try to bash me cuz u dont have an answer to this post.

edberg505
03-20-2006, 04:43 PM
Follow your logic, you think James Blake is overall better player than Nadal because he has a 2-0 record against Nadal? Krajicek is a better player than Sampras because his 6-4 record against Sampras?

You are the one who should pull your moron head out of your dumb ***!


tlm, you just got OWNED!!!

tlm
03-20-2006, 05:37 PM
Who srarted the attacks first?I am still waitng for the answer of why fed has a losing record against nadal.I see fed boys dont want to talk about that,ya i will say tennisguy makes a good point.I want to see nadal+blake play a few more times.According to what i read here nadal+ blake are just runner ups there is only one master fed.There is a lot of talk of fed being the best of all time.And nadal is just claycourter,to defensive ,plays to physical of a game, it goes on+on.So it would seem impossible for him to win 3out of 4 against fed.I guess the personal attacks are okay if they come from someone that shares your opinion,I responded to the attacks that were started by tennisguy not me.

Bichigo
03-20-2006, 06:10 PM
Geez I'm telling you.. Jimmy Connors would laugh in Nadals face! Jimmy Connor's brilliant smile and charm should easily pop any opponent's strings on demand. yes.. just like that..

epilespaul
03-20-2006, 06:25 PM
yo, i am a Nadal's fan, but i reckon the stuff bout him going to win 35-40 grand slams is a lot of bull ****, if u ask me. SUre he is gud, but sooner or later , otha new players will outplay him and even outplay fed. Nadal may hav fed's numba, but it doesnt neccessarily mean he is betta... both their strenths and weaknesses in tennis are in different aspect.

OkStateFan
03-20-2006, 07:17 PM
first of all tlm,tennis guy said pull ur head out of ur ***, he didnt call u a jerk-off there's a difference, and like i said im not talking about federer my discusion was only about nadal and blake.Your constantly making assumptions of what i believe and ur assuming wrong. i dont believe that nadals just a clay courter and plays a too physical game. You said u wanted an answer about federer and nadal from me, well seeing as how i didnt even discuss federer that would technically be a non-sequitor. Alls im saying is ur making nadal out be a giant like some ppl on the board do with federer, but according to ur logic nadal couldnt be a giant because there are others on tour that are better than him. i.e. James Blake

FuZz_Da_AcE
03-20-2006, 08:13 PM
During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama.

there is no chance in hell that this will happen. for one, sampras was arguably the greatest player in the world, yet he only ended up with 14 grand slam titles. two, very, very soon, federer will figure out a way to overcome nadal pernamently, and then federer's domination will re-continue. three, saying that a single man will dominate for the next 10-15 years is like saying that no world juniors ever existed...for example, bernard tomic, who is ranked 205 in the world juniors at 13. >>> http://www.tennisaustralia.com.au/pages/default.aspx?id=4&PageID=3295

idle_fire
03-21-2006, 03:53 AM
Who srarted the attacks first?I am still waitng for the answer of why fed has a losing record against nadal.
The answer is everyboy is beatable. But don't make Fed like a looser like you did.

hey tim you're really idiot and stubborn. All your posts is su**s!!
I can tell you you're a Nadal-maniac. Almost all your posts blame Federer
C'mon kid.....don't you have another topics in your brainless head....ugh!!!!! Even you don't like Federer (and i'm sure) try give him little bit respect...he's NO.1 IN THE WORLD and where all that comes from, foolish.

Many times you said "Fed beating hacks players and rarely beat the top players" and what was that mean???
Yoo kid, i'm fedfan but i respect that Nadal is good and he has power to beat anybody but in another side Fed also has. 7 GS at 24, well i'm just curious how many GS that Nadal will have when he is 24....

Don't write any comment without any basis.

idle_fire
03-21-2006, 04:10 AM
Ya i know nadal beats fed 3out of 4 times but fed is much better.Pull yor head out of your arse.If he is so much better then why doesnt he beat him everytime.You fed fans always have to talk about total points or fed wasnt there when nadal won the master series, who cares your the one referring to stats + rankings.I have played sports all my life+ when it comes to saying whos better or what team is better nothing determines it better than head to head competition.3 wins to 1 loss seems pretty obvious.You fed fans always seem to avoid this fact, that is why you have to change the subject to rankings or something else.Just please explain how someone so superior loses 3 out of 4 times.Let me see fed wasnt feeling good,the surface was not right or some other bs excuse.Just let me know when fed has the upper hand in head to head competition, then i will say fed is better. Because that is what really tells the truth of who is better.

When i saw this post... i agree with what tennis guy said.
YOU"RE A DUMB *** AND DON"T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SPORTS.

i can say nadal is better from Gasquet (at least for now) because they are same ages each other but Nadal got far more than Gasquet did. But think twice yoo amateur, so you think a 7 GS titles player is better than 1 GS title player??? Tennis is not about 2 players but there are many players out there. Well, Nadal lost twice to Blake but i don't think Blake is better than Nadal because all that Nadal got is better than Blake. So just don't look at a person from one side but there are many aspects that's make a player is better or not.

Shabazza
03-21-2006, 05:40 AM
don't try to discuss with trolls - it's a waste of time!
they're immune to logic and arguments and will just start to flame you.
Ignore is the best option! ;)

tlm
03-21-2006, 06:38 AM
Ya idle fire you call me an idiot + then write this: hey tim you're really idiot and stubborn. All your posts is su**s!! Now that is funny,did you pass 4th grade?

RussR
03-21-2006, 08:47 AM
How can anyone who really follows the game truly believe that a one-dimensional baseliner that plays from 8 feet behind the court can ever dominate an effective all-courter? Nadal will have a run, and would be #1 for a time if Fed had never played the game. McEnroe drove Borg out of tennis because he had a more diverse game. Chang eventually wore himself down scrambling around at the backstop like Nadal does. Agassi and Connors also had no net games, but as mentioined previously, they played close to baseline and hit the ball on the rise, forcing the other guy to do the running. Nadal is just another Hewitt/Chang/dozens of Spaniards and Argentinians. Fed will figure out a way to dominate him just like he did Nalbandian. Sober up.

Rickson
03-21-2006, 01:38 PM
7 grand slams to 1 and winner of the last 3 slams. I think that makes it obvious that Federer is better than Nadal right now.

tlm
03-21-2006, 02:33 PM
We will have to wait +see how many slams nadal will have by the time he is 24.Nadal already has 1 +he is only 19.I dont think fed had any until he was 22,if nadal keeps improving i think he will pass fed in grand slam titles.

Rickson
03-21-2006, 03:03 PM
We will have to wait +see how many slams nadal will have by the time he is 24.Nadal already has 1 +he is only 19.I dont think fed had any until he was 22,if nadal keeps improving i think he will pass fed in grand slam titles.
I like that response. I might not agree with you about Nadal being better than Federer, but you're sticking to your guns and that's a good thing. A true fan never abandons his athlete so if we have this discussion in a few months and Nadal happens to be in a major slump, I'll expect you'll still be behind him.

Turning Pro
03-21-2006, 04:14 PM
35-40 grands slams is where i stopped.Maybe i should of stopped earlier.

ssuHeartsRivald
03-21-2006, 04:53 PM
We will have to wait +see how many slams nadal will have by the time he is 24.Nadal already has 1 +he is only 19.I dont think fed had any until he was 22,if nadal keeps improving i think he will pass fed in grand slam titles.

What are you waiting for?
Even Federer not yet to stop getting his GSs. Maybe when Nadal get 7, Federer have 14. Admit it that now Federer is better than Nadal.

tim: Once a jerk, still a jerk.

Grimjack
03-21-2006, 05:34 PM
We will have to wait +see how many slams nadal will have by the time he is 24.Nadal already has 1 +he is only 19.I dont think fed had any until he was 22,if nadal keeps improving i think he will pass fed in grand slam titles.

If Fed stops winning slams right now, Nadal could never catch him. Nadal is only a threat at one out of four, and he can only manage to stay healthy enough to play in that one once out of every three years or so.

Nadal's legend = fraud.

gaspard
03-21-2006, 06:16 PM
Man, the insults are flying in this thread. I'll just stick to logic and tennis. I'm going to post something similar to an entry I made in another thread, if my memory serves, which seems to have disappeared, not my memory, the other thread. It was the one about who is better between Federer and Nadal. Does anyone know what happened to it?

Anyway, how early ones success starts as a pro, is not always a good indicator of how succcesful ones career will be. Ok, Federer won his first Grand Slam when he was 21 and Nadal when he was 19. But Becker and Chang won their first Grand Slam when they were 17, and Hewitt was world No.1 at 20. Federer has already surpassed them all, despite his later start. The GS Chang won at 17 was his first and last. Becker won only 5 more, despite his enormous potential. In fact, Becker was the world No.2 at 19 as well. It took him another 5 years before he achieved the No.1 position and he was only there for a grand total of 12 weeks, with a 20 week interruption from Edberg, so not even consecutive weeks. He never ended the year as No.1. As for Hewitt, he has been totally left behind by Federer, maxing out at 2 majors. It is normally very tough to accumulate Grand Slams, which makes Federer's achievements all the more remarkable. Agassi was world No.3 at 18, but it took him up to the age of 30 to get to 8 Grand Slams, some almost never happened. Mats Wilander maxed out at 7, despite winning his first at 17. Federer is already at these figures and he is just getting started. All of the players mentioned here, were better than Federer at a younger age, as is Nadal, but the difference is, they did not have his potential and the capacity to realize it.

Ok, so what is to stop Nadal doing just as well or better? Personally, I don't see Nadal winning more than 4 majors, max. I think he will win another, maybe 2 more, but I am even doubtful of a 4th. Nadal's style of play is far too defensive. It depends on him running everything down, very similar to Chang and Hewitt. This is a very tough way to play tennis in the modern game. I think that players with more firepower will, at some point, begin to get the better of him, as Federer and others have with Hewitt, and Blake did against Nadal in Indian Wells, and this will begin to take its toll.

In my other post, someone suggested that Nadal was young and had time to develop a more attacking style. Yes, I believe this is true. I think he can improve that aspect of his game, but this is not his natural style, so I do not see him being able to produce this type of style efficiently, in the way that Becker, Sampras, Safin, Federer, Berdych etc can, it will always be a struggle.

I also think that the mental challenges will become tougher for him now that he is no longer considered the underdog up and coming young gun with nothing to lose. He will be the favourite in most of his matches, apart from when he plays Federer, and there will be more pressure in the expectation he should win, as has been the case against Blake, a test that he has so far failed. Ironically, because he has now been beaten twice by him, in their next encounter he might fair better, because this expectation will not be present so much anymore, Blake, in fact, might feel there is pressure on him.

I think Nadal will have a very good career, in the way that Chang, Muster, Hewitt etc have, but I do not see him achieving what Federer will in the game. I also think Federer will turn round the head to head.

Now I'm going to save all of this, in case this post gets deleted as well. It would be great if anyone could tell me what happened to the other thread in the general area.

Gaspard

jstr
03-21-2006, 07:03 PM
Sounds like Federer had trouble seeing in the match vs. Nadal at the French in 2005, or so the commentators said. It was dusk and the powers that be weren't turning the lights on for whatever reason.
As far as other matches go that he loses, he probably doesn't go "all out" at EVERY match because he'd burn out/acquire injuries. Sounds like players have to be superhuman to deal with this modern tournament schedule anyway.
Anyway, Haas is Fed's man to contend with...

tlm
03-22-2006, 06:11 AM
Ya he was crying about low light at the french, he just wanted to make an excuse for the butt whooping he was getting.Nadal made fed look bad at the french,fed was falling on his ***+throwing his little hissy fits.Then he wants to have the match called because of light.That showed his true colors right there,its easy to be a good winner but looked like mr. class showed a different side when he was losing.That is what is funny about this site, if roddick acts like a jerk at all he gets ripped to shreads,but pretty boy fed can be a poor loser+nobody says a word.And i am sure that is the only reason fed ever loses, because he dosent go all out.What kind of statement is that.Is that what happened last time he played nadal in the finals,he didnt go all out?

federerhoogenbandfan
03-22-2006, 06:26 AM
Roger will challenge him.

gaspard
03-22-2006, 10:37 AM
Actually, if you watch their matches again, I think you'll find that the balance was pretty tight in all of them, could have gone either way, although I did not see their first match, so I don't know about that one, I understand Federer was ill in that game. I don't think Federer is particularly concerned about Nadal because Nadal has the type of game that allows Fed to control a lot of the points and get into the match, it's just that Nadal gets so much back, so Federer has to watch his consistency and placement. There is no fear that he will be blown away be Nadal, in the way Hewitt and Sampras were in the US Open finals by Federer and Safin respectively. Nadal does not have that type of game, it is more of a scrambling and retrieving game. I think Federer will be more concerned about someone like Berdych in the future. Berdych is big, he can move and he has the firepower to hurt Federer, also, mentally, he already pretty much thinks he is the best or at least will be, he has that confidence. Of course he still needs to develop some more, but I see him being a real problem for Federer in the future if he continues to progress. Time will tell.

Gaspard

stoneagle
03-22-2006, 01:12 PM
Man, the insults are flying in this thread. I'll just stick to logic and tennis. I'm going to post something similar to an entry I made in another thread, if my memory serves, which seems to have disappeared, not my memory, the other thread. It was the one about who is better between Federer and Nadal. Does anyone know what happened to it?

Anyway, how early ones success starts as a pro, is not always a good indicator of how succcesful ones career will be. Ok, Federer won his first Grand Slam when he was 21 and Nadal when he was 19. But Becker and Chang won their first Grand Slam when they were 17, and Hewitt was world No.1 at 20. Federer has already surpassed them all, despite his later start. The GS Chang won at 17 was his first and last. Becker won only 5 more, despite his enormous potential. In fact, Becker was the world No.2 at 19 as well. It took him another 5 years before he achieved the No.1 position and he was only there for a grand total of 12 weeks, with a 20 week interruption from Edberg, so not even consecutive weeks. He never ended the year as No.1. As for Hewitt, he has been totally left behind by Federer, maxing out at 2 majors. It is normally very tough to accumulate Grand Slams, which makes Federer's achievements all the more remarkable. Agassi was world No.3 at 18, but it took him up to the age of 30 to get to 8 Grand Slams, some almost never happened. Mats Wilander maxed out at 7, despite winning his first at 17. Federer is already at these figures and he is just getting started. All of the players mentioned here, were better than Federer at a younger age, as is Nadal, but the difference is, they did not have his potential and the capacity to realize it.

Ok, so what is to stop Nadal doing just as well or better? Personally, I don't see Nadal winning more than 4 majors, max. I think he will win another, maybe 2 more, but I am even doubtful of a 4th. Nadal's style of play is far too defensive. It depends on him running everything down, very similar to Chang and Hewitt. This is a very tough way to play tennis in the modern game. I think that players with more firepower will, at some point, begin to get the better of him, as Federer and others have with Hewitt, and Blake did against Nadal in Indian Wells, and this will begin to take its toll.

In my other post, someone suggested that Nadal was young and had time to develop a more attacking style. Yes, I believe this is true. I think he can improve that aspect of his game, but this is not his natural style, so I do not see him being able to produce this type of style efficiently, in the way that Becker, Sampras, Safin, Federer, Berdych etc can, it will always be a struggle.

I also think that the mental challenges will become tougher for him now that he is no longer considered the underdog up and coming young gun with nothing to lose. He will be the favourite in most of his matches, apart from when he plays Federer, and there will be more pressure in the expectation he should win, as has been the case against Blake, a test that he has so far failed. Ironically, because he has now been beaten twice by him, in their next encounter he might fair better, because this expectation will not be present so much anymore, Blake, in fact, might feel there is pressure on him.

I think Nadal will have a very good career, in the way that Chang, Muster, Hewitt etc have, but I do not see him achieving what Federer will in the game. I also think Federer will turn round the head to head.

Now I'm going to save all of this, in case this post gets deleted as well. It would be great if anyone could tell me what happened to the other thread in the general area.

Gaspard

From now on: Nadal will change his style or tactics soon,
he will changed his style that didn't worked against blake.

i think Nadal will play more agressive style, he will attack more
on the net often when there is a chance. he will vary shot
to throw off his opponents. he will improve his volley more.

i don't think nadal will become a one dimensional player,
of course he will evaluate his loss to blake and make few
changes here and there. nadal is not stupid to not to
change his tactics.

edberg505
03-22-2006, 01:21 PM
From now on: Nadal will change his style or tactics soon,
he will changed his style that didn't worked against blake.

i think Nadal will play more agressive style, he will attack more
on the net often when there is a chance. he will vary shot
to throw off his opponents. he will improve his volley more.

i don't think nadal will become a one dimensional player,
of course he will evaluate his loss to blake and make few
changes here and there. nadal is not stupid to not to
change his tactics.

Well, this is the 2nd time he's lost to him;)

gaspard
03-22-2006, 02:21 PM
From now on: Nadal will change his style or tactics soon,
he will changed his style that didn't worked against blake.

i think Nadal will play more agressive style, he will attack more
on the net often when there is a chance. he will vary shot
to throw off his opponents. he will improve his volley more.

i don't think nadal will become a one dimensional player,
of course he will evaluate his loss to blake and make few
changes here and there. nadal is not stupid to not to
change his tactics.

This is easier said than done. Look at Roddick.

slice bh compliment
03-22-2006, 02:31 PM
Ya he was crying about low light at the french, he just wanted to make an excuse for the butt whooping he was getting.Nadal made fed look bad at the french,fed was falling on his ***+throwing his little hissy fits.Then he wants to have the match called because of light.That showed his true colors right there,its easy to be a good winner but looked like mr. class showed a different side when he was losing.That is what is funny about this site, if roddick acts like a jerk at all he gets ripped to shreads,but pretty boy fed can be a poor loser+nobody says a word.And i am sure that is the only reason fed ever loses, because he dosent go all out.What kind of statement is that.Is that what happened last time he played nadal in the finals,he didnt go all out?

Good points. Now, I must ask....do you try to paint Federer as a gay male? Effeminate?
If there is something you know that we do not, please correspond directly with Ace&Gary and Warriorroger (especially warriorroger).
Thanks.

Brettolius
03-24-2006, 12:07 PM
WOW, tlm, how did that taste dog? Moya just whooped Nadal. Who can challenge him? How about anyone on any given day!

equinox
06-24-2009, 11:19 AM
Nadal will spend more time out of the game injured than winning tournaments. He'll win a few french opens and maybe one hardcourt slam.
He'll hold number #1 ranking for a few weeks or month at a time.
Injuries from the tough demanding style of game he plays will cut his career short by serveral years.
That's my prediction.

Yes i agree, he's finished. do you have a magic 8 ball?

1st seed alldayy
06-25-2009, 06:52 AM
i think federer wants to beat pete sampras's record and he knows it that he has to beat nadal for it.

Rickson
06-26-2009, 11:56 AM
Well Pete's record is going down in just over a week.

lawlitssoo1n
06-26-2009, 11:49 PM
federer ftw. LOOK at federer he's not as fit as nadal and he's still pwning. imagine if federer was super cut like nadal and could run as fast as nadal can federer would be godlike(he still is) all nadal on federer is his topspin, thats why nadal loses to tall ppl.

however with one of the posts above, i think nadal will change his tactics. he has to work on his backhand slicing
BUT nadal is still young and having knee problems already?? i don't see too much of a bright future

LxxP
07-05-2009, 03:30 PM
Nadal and Federer are two great players. Im sure Federer and Nadal will win for a few more years before the next generation takes over.

DownTheLine
07-07-2009, 08:04 PM
Nadal will not be on the tour for long because of his playing style.

The real question is, will Novak and Murray have rivals? Excluding themselves.

Rickson
07-08-2009, 04:22 AM
http://www.visitallan.biz/neowin/fail-sail.jpg

t3nn3s
07-10-2009, 09:30 PM
Nadal is the greatest. So, no.

Rickson
07-12-2009, 04:12 AM
It's ashame how people only go with the times. Nadal might have seemed invincible, but I knew Federer would overtake him for the number 1 slot again.

scraps234
07-13-2009, 02:34 PM
Nadal is the greatest. So, no.

well whose number 1 now....:twisted:

Bud
08-29-2009, 09:50 AM
Nadal and Federer are two great players. Im sure Federer and Nadal will win for a few more years before the next generation takes over.

Agreed... :)

JoshDragon
08-30-2009, 07:33 PM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.

I know this post is more than 3 years old but I have to comment on something. There was never any chance that Nadal would be dominating the game 12 years from now and he certainly wouldn't be on the tour 17 years from now.

Even the youngest players on the tour like Ryan Harrison will be retiring if they haven't already retired in 17 years.

SuperDuy
10-06-2009, 01:34 PM
well whose number 1 now....:twisted:

roger federer is

Slice_Serve
10-12-2009, 07:57 AM
Del Potro will win the hard court tournaments from here on since Federer is an old man, Roddick will win Wimbledon and Nadal/Soderling will win RG. Murraylol is going nowhere.

cork_screw
10-13-2009, 02:06 PM
what do you mean by this thread? being that nadal has struggled since the start of Roland Garros everyone is a threat. He doesn't play the same, I think he needs to go back to his pirate pants and his cut off shirt, the inner tiger in him is caged.

Karlovic's Sunglasses
10-16-2009, 12:18 PM
what do you mean by this thread? being that nadal has struggled since the start of Roland Garros everyone is a threat. He doesn't play the same, I think he needs to go back to his pirate pants and his cut off shirt, the inner tiger in him is caged.

Nah, his knees are just screwed up dude. He wasn't going to last long anyway. He'll win a few more grand slams.

andfor
11-26-2009, 03:03 PM
Fabricated knee injury, ITF forced injury time off to cover up and get off the roids, skinnier now, he'll ever will be the same. Will win some clay master series and another French or two but he won't win anymore hard or grass court major titles.

JerrYMeeE
12-21-2009, 05:29 PM
Nadal will spend more time out of the game injured than winning tournaments. He'll win a few french opens and maybe one hardcourt slam.
He'll hold number #1 ranking for a few weeks or month at a time.
Injuries from the tough demanding style of game he plays will cut his career short by serveral years.
That's my prediction.

Wow, 3 years ago, you sure had the right idea.

Kaz00
12-28-2009, 12:36 AM
Soderling and Del Potro come to mind as rivals to nadal lol...

Ultimatum
12-28-2009, 08:12 PM
Plenty. Top ten players ( With exception of Fed till he gets some more wins over him), aren't intimidated by him anymore, on HC at least. Instead, the Nadal now is a choke-resistant big-hitter's dream opponent on a HC.

bieker
01-02-2010, 05:32 PM
4 years later...

He's definitely on track for 35 grand slams lol...

tennis24
01-04-2010, 07:21 PM
Nadal and Federer are two great players. Im sure Federer and Nadal will win for a few more years before the next generation takes over.

RIDICULOUS!! nadal will have more GREAT wins out of him and i think he will be a contender for a long time. same with federer

tennis24
01-04-2010, 07:28 PM
i think sam querry/ john isner will be coming up soon. ANd del potro and soderling and monfils

VamosRafa10
01-06-2010, 02:58 AM
4 years later...

He's definitely on track for 35 grand slams lol...
Just another 29 to go. No problem at all.:)

MethodTennis
01-29-2010, 04:23 PM
RIDICULOUS!! nadal will have more GREAT wins out of him and i think he will be a contender for a long time. same with federer

ye nadal will be up there for at least 6 more weeks. Nad ***** need to realise that federer runs the show and that Hewitt safin roddick and nadal have been his toys for his tennis career

ChopShot
01-30-2010, 10:01 AM
Agreed. The knee is obviously not going away - either he needs to get away from tennis entirely until his knee is sound again - or he can kiss his tennis career goodbye.

ollinger
02-10-2010, 02:56 PM
It seems silly to be staring at one or two "Will Nadal have any rival..." threads every time I open this site. The guy is toast.

malakas
02-10-2010, 03:05 PM
that's not silly.WHAT is silly is reviving a 3 year old thread only to quote yourself and brag about it.

vincent_tennis
03-03-2010, 12:36 PM
his knees ;)

formula16
03-05-2010, 08:10 PM
Nadal will spend more time out of the game injured than winning tournaments. He'll win a few french opens and maybe one hardcourt slam.
He'll hold number #1 ranking for a few weeks or month at a time.
Injuries from the tough demanding style of game he plays will cut his career short by serveral years.
That's my prediction.

spot on ;)

acintya
03-31-2010, 09:09 AM
if nadal would be a robot he would dominate until today and many years more! ;)

kingdaddy41788
03-31-2010, 09:12 AM
Good LORD this is the most ridiculous thread ever...

andfor
03-31-2010, 09:17 AM
if nadal would be a robot he would dominate until today and many years more! ;)

Oh yea? We'll if Laver would have stopped aging from about 1964 on he would have all the records now. He'd easily have schooled, Sampras, Federer and Nadal all while using a wood racquet. So there.

acintya
03-31-2010, 11:28 AM
no way. sport is more professional today. there is more $$$ in, better trainings, better condition and not JUST talent ;)

this is like u would say that Pele was the best football player of all time. so wrong! ;)

andfor
03-31-2010, 12:55 PM
no way. sport is more professional today. there is more $$$ in, better trainings, better condition and not JUST talent ;)

this is like u would say that Pele was the best football player of all time. so wrong! ;)

Wrong and wrong.

And Laver and Pele would not get to train the same as today's athletes? That's not fair. Make the equipment and trainning the same. I'm sure that I am right with out being able to prove it.

tennis_balla
04-02-2010, 12:54 PM
Oh yea? We'll if Laver would have stopped aging from about 1964 on he would have all the records now. He'd easily have schooled, Sampras, Federer and Nadal all while using a wood racquet. So there.

Whatever you're smoking give me some!!

rudester
04-04-2010, 03:34 PM
the mind reels

A_Chong
04-12-2010, 05:34 AM
This thread is just absurd, well in my opinion. Federer just dominates everyone in the tour. Plus, Nadal's knee is dragging him down and will stay with him..

formula16
04-13-2010, 09:16 PM
well the answers pretty obvious isn't it?

nadal's biggest rival, and biggest threat, is his knee!

dmt
04-14-2010, 07:51 PM
ye nadal will be up there for at least 6 more weeks. Nad ***** need to realise that federer runs the show and that Hewitt safin roddick and nadal have been his toys for his tennis career

if Nadal is federer's toy, how come federer struggles so much with him? *******

Leelord337
04-22-2010, 01:14 PM
has anybody mentioned Davydenko or Soderling?

x Southpaw x
04-30-2010, 09:28 AM
Will nadal have any rival to challenge him? Yeah, ME. I've already mastered the VAMOS and the underwear picking. I'm starting to get pretty good at hurting my knee too.

BullDogTennis
05-22-2010, 03:30 PM
this thread cracks me up

MethodTennis
05-29-2010, 03:41 AM
if Nadal is federer's toy, how come federer struggles so much with him? *******

I'm pretty sure federer has strugelled with all of the players i mentioned at some point but in the end federer is number one, and tbh ive never liked federer, my favourite players have been moya hewwit JCF and roddick,

To say that nadal is on par or better than federer is delousional.

Look at the nadal hewwit record, nadal cant beat him on hard and hewwit cant win on clay, theyve both just been people that you hope might be the one to beat federer on there preffered surfaces,

Look at the federer hewitt record and tell me that hewitt hasnt been federers toy since 2004, from 2000-2003 hewitt challenged, this would be the current sitution with-in the rivalry nadal is in.

Roddick also went through a period of challenging federer although he didnt win many of the matches they were far closer than many of the other 6-0 sets,

Safin pushed federer nearly ever time they played despite never really caring too much about the sport,

And then finally you have david nalbandian who has possibly been federers toughest opponent with a 8-10 record, he could beat federer on any surface not just clay or hardcourt or grass like many of his other rivals,

Nadal will eventually hit the part of the rival at the end known as the lossing streak which all these players have entered when there decent record against federer is decimated.

D-man
09-30-2010, 12:00 AM
This thread is just absurd, well in my opinion. Federer just dominates everyone in the tour. Plus, Nadal's knee is dragging him down and will stay with him..

Is it though?

fed_the_savior
10-20-2010, 02:42 AM
Why is this thread here.

FTS
11-11-2010, 05:17 PM
i think murray and djokovic

Tennis sensation
11-15-2010, 03:05 AM
i think murray and djokovic

Can't say about Murray but Djokovic for sure

stevenwags987
11-15-2010, 07:31 PM
DEL POTRO!!!!!

Cilic, Murry, Djokavic

And Federer will still be a pain for Nadal for the next 3 years.

-Steven

Borg Forever
12-13-2010, 09:48 AM
It's gonna be tough for Nadal to surpass Harri Heliovaara.

Tony Stark
01-25-2011, 05:15 PM
Of course Novaak Djokovic and Federer of course. but I would rather bet on Djokovic as he is way way way younger than any of those top 5 in the world...hah !!!

Djokolate
02-06-2011, 10:47 PM
cilic djoko davydenko << get good davy lol you were amazing
and ofcourse delpo... and fed
OHH and soderling, berdych

CANTGETENOUGHTENNIS!
02-13-2011, 11:58 AM
BTW now rafa has won 9 slams and i think some juniors coming up have a very good chance when he is 30 and degrading like aggasi and sampras so ya there will be challenges for him

phnx90
03-27-2011, 06:03 AM
Of course Novaak Djokovic and Federer of course. but I would rather bet on Djokovic as he is way way way younger than any of those top 5 in the world...hah !!!

Actually Djokovic is only a year younger than Rafa, and is the same age as Murray. Only Roger is much older.

F-T-S
04-05-2011, 12:15 AM
Djokovic it is.

phnx90
04-05-2011, 04:26 PM
Djokovic it is.

Definitely. Eg Miami and Indian Wells 2011.

alen_david
06-10-2011, 03:20 PM
Everyone on the ATP tour is a challenge to everyone else. Any tennis player on the tour has the chance to pull an upset against Nadal. Now, yes the chances of that happening might be fat or slim and such chances are so sensitive to external factors such as court conditions, weather, players' injuries... the list goes on. But yes it is easy to say that the top few (top 5) players in the ATP would most likely see each other in the latter parts of any tournament/major. But then again those upsets I were talking about might happen and shock everyone. For me, personally, I had low hopes for Del Potro during the '09 USO finals but he managed to pulled through and eventually beat 'the best ever.'

zepphead33
06-24-2011, 01:20 PM
its funny looking at this 5 years later

got spin?
06-28-2011, 01:44 PM
Wow, this was before Murray and Djoker came into the Equation!

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-02-2011, 06:25 AM
By the way he rips through his opponents with ease, I doubt will there be anyone who can atleast challenge Rafa in his entire career. Atleast, Sampras had Agassi, Rafter etc who won him quite a few times. As of now, no body (Federer included) seems to stand a chance against him. Nadal is only 19 and he can very well dominate the circuit for atleast 10 or may be even 15 more years. During this period, if he continues to annihilate his opponenets in the way he does right now which is likely the case and maintains the same form, he would end up winning atleast 35 - 40 grand slam titles. In fact he would win anything and everything that he enters. Don't be surprised but it's very well a possibility. I am not sarcastic but I am stating the obvious fact. No body has ever dominated the game with such an authority as this guy does. So tennis is heading towards a single man domination for the next 10-15 years with no real drama. That's what I feel. But it would be good if some youngster (Monfils, Gasquet or Young) rises up and at least throws him a challenge if not beat him though it would be highly unlikely. I don't like Nadal's dominance because of his brash, arrogant and ruthless personality and Nadal's fans can happily enjoy the game for the next 15-20 years where the game will have only a single winner in every tournament. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human. Federer fans and fans of other players can better stop watching tennis. Other players can only compete for runners up.

Get a clue, man.

George123
09-21-2011, 07:39 AM
This thread has to be an epic fail after the 2011 season! about 2 people mentioned djokovic, so lol at the rest of the predictions on this thread.

SoBad
09-30-2011, 06:12 PM
Frankly, I can't think of anyone who can beat Rafa. He is beyond human.

I agree with you, I think Rafa may well go undefeated on the tour in 2012.

F-T-S
01-29-2012, 10:07 PM
I agree with you, I think Rafa may well go undefeated on the tour in 2012.

good call

SoBad
02-03-2012, 08:35 PM
F-T-S is the least talented poster of all time, men and women.

6-1 6-3 6-0
07-08-2012, 12:20 PM
YEah. His only real opponent is history. And history is his only opponent.

Rod Laver's a total chump in the presence of Rafa.
Bjorn Borg's 6 Slams at Roland and 5 at the All England Club: nothing compared to Rafa.
Edberg, Mac, Sampras? One-trick ponies. Glorified Rafters and Stichs.
Boris? Undedicated. Not a fighter. Not worthy of the same paragraph as Rafa.
Agassi winning all four Slams: a blip on Rafa's screen.
Budge, Tilden, Kramer, Perry, Gonzales? They bow before Rafa's greatness.
Lendl, Borg, Vilas, Muster, Bruguera, Kuerten? After watching Rafa, they finally understand how to compete on clay!!
Yannick Noah and Jim Courier? Lacking in charisma compared to the wonderful Rafa Nadal.

;)

Okay joy, we appreciate and admire your enthusiasm. People like VamosRafa or Uncle Toni (Nadal)...or Rafa himself would love to read your words. But don't you think even THEY would consider them a little premature?

How times have changed. :D

Zarfot Z
07-27-2012, 12:03 AM
You know what's so funny?

The fact that OP posted this in 2006, smack bang in the middle of King Roger Federer's golden reign. During which, by the way, he amassed 3 of the 4 Grand Slams and an incredible win rate of 92-5. Second best season of all time, behind Laver's Calendar Grand Slam year of 1969.

Hilarious.

CrownR
08-07-2012, 12:25 PM
Ah, this thread was hiliarious..
Especially the first couple pages.
Nadal forever the King of Clay!

RF20Lennon
09-21-2012, 03:51 PM
You know what's so funny?

The fact that OP posted this in 2006, smack bang in the middle of King Roger Federer's golden reign. During which, by the way, he amassed 3 of the 4 Grand Slams and an incredible win rate of 92-5. Second best season of all time, behind Laver's Calendar Grand Slam year of 1969.

Hilarious.

GOSPEL^^^ LOL!!

Ary1923
03-11-2013, 07:39 PM
Im a big fan of Nadal too, but seeing his playing this Indian Wells, i dont think he will win this tournament, seems like his not on his best right now (still recovering)...

Roger2003Wimbledon
08-08-2013, 12:41 PM
40 slams, thats going well.

SuperDuy
09-04-2013, 10:07 PM
your full of crap lmao. Fed is god, you must be referring to him right? nadals gonna run outta gas or get injured so take that into account within the 40 slams buddy

great prediction

ThomasGB
03-27-2014, 11:48 AM
I'm pretty sure Novak's going to win this tournament, Nadal still has back problems, and although he's been playing well so far, if he does face Novak in the finals, I expect he'll lose. 7-5, 6-3, 6-4.

bullfan
08-15-2014, 09:43 AM
Fascinating that this was written in 2006, when Nadal had a single GS!

Goosehead
09-13-2014, 06:36 PM
this is the thread that keeps on giving..:) looks like op is defo on track with his "I see 35-40 slams for nadal" prediction.:neutral:

this thread will still be going in the year 2086 :twisted: it will be bumped to celebrate rafa winning his "40th slam" at the French open on his 100th burfdayy. :shock:

SoBad
09-13-2014, 06:38 PM
The off-season is great -- gotta love all the excitement around the Astana/London/Shanghai exhibitions in the holiday season leading to the Australian Open!

Gemini
09-17-2014, 02:03 PM
this is the thread that keeps on giving..:) looks like op is defo on track with his "I see 35-40 slams for nadal" prediction.:neutral:

this thread will still be going in the year 2086 :twisted: it will be bumped to celebrate rafa winning his "40th slam" at the French open on his 100th burfdayy. :shock:

It's got a ways to go before it reaches this thread:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=375598&page=136