PDA

View Full Version : Rivals


Breaker
05-26-2006, 03:42 PM
Being a one on one sport there are a lot of rivalries that people don't seem to talk about. It seems that fans of one side tend to naturally not like the other without realizing it, in your opinions what are some of the biggest rivalries on tour?

IMO

Federer-Nadal (obviously)
Blake-Hewitt (They always seem to meet each other at sometime during the year, and it's never a straight sets win every time seems to be a tough struggle)
Nalbandian-Ljubicic (3 and 4 respectively at the moment, already met 3 times this year and when they face off it's extremely unpredictable as to who will win)

Probably more but I'd like to see everyone's opinion :) .

wyutani
05-26-2006, 03:48 PM
greates rival this season:

safin - rochus
safin - Nieminen
safin - tim henman
safin - gasquet
safin - almago
safin - Mathieu
safin - Ramirez Hidalgo
safin - Saretta, Flavio
safin - davydenko

Ken B.
05-26-2006, 04:12 PM
Baghdatis-Roddick
Federer-Haas
Grossjean-Keifer (Germany vs France again! Oh my!)

superman1
05-26-2006, 04:57 PM
Agassi/Blake, Agassi/Federer.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 04:58 PM
Nadal's only real rival is Blake. Everybody else who beats him does it in a fluke, meaning they only do it once and it was a huge upset, or lose to him almost everytime the way Federer, Robredo, Coria, and others all do.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 05:12 PM
Nadal's rivals are Blake and Federer.

Nadal isn't as God Almight as you make him out to be.

Kabob190
05-26-2006, 05:36 PM
Nadal, Federer, and Blake have this rivalry triangle thing going on

wyutani
05-26-2006, 05:38 PM
Nadal, Federer, and Blake have this rivalry triangle thing going on

put berdych in and we have a square...

drakulie
05-26-2006, 05:44 PM
I don't think you could really call Nadal-Federer a rivalry until Federer starts winning some of those matches. I remember when people were saying Federer-Roddick were a rivalry----well, we all know how that one has turned out.


Kind of agree with Kabob190. Federer beats Blake, Blake beats Nadal, Nadal beats Federer.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 05:51 PM
It is a slap in the face to Nadal to call Federer a rival to him. Nadal just beats him over and over, 6-1 or 5-1, whatever it is, is not a rivalry. Federer is not a rival to Nadal you bunch of Federer-fanatic trolls. Nadal's only rival is Blake, that is it Blake. Other players he loses to are 1-time flukes and he doesnt lose to them again.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 05:57 PM
...I'm sorry but I am anything but a Federer fanatic troll, I just beleived it was a rivalry because they have heated matchups and there seems to just be something about the matchups that makes them special outside of them being 1 and two. And anyway I'm the only one who's said it was a rivalry so there's no reason to insult anyone else. But by your description how is Blake a rival to Nadal? I don't see any wins on Nadal's part there only 2-0 Blake :rolleyes: .

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 05:59 PM
I am sorry, if you believe it is a rivalry I should not insult your opinion, you are allowed your own belief. I just dont think people should call it a rivalry since Federer cant beat Nadal, and that is not a real rivalry, a real rivalry both people win matches and that does not happen with Nadal and Federer, my Nadal is just too good and does not allow poor Federer any wins so I cant call them rivals. I am sorry if I was rude.

Polaris
05-26-2006, 06:05 PM
double post. sorry.

Polaris
05-26-2006, 06:06 PM
[..] my Nadal is just too good [..]
Thanks for your fair and balanced perspective.:p

dh003i
05-26-2006, 06:07 PM
draculie,

It's a smack i nthe face to Federer to say there isn't a rivalry with Nadal.

He's the second best player on clay, and getting better. As the last match showed -- despite the fanatical claims of Nadal fans -- is that they're essentially even.

Oh, that's also the opinion of Rod Laver. I think he knows a little more about tennis than you do. Just a guess. Laver thinks Federer doesn't need to do much to beat Nadal other than what he's already done.

Oh, btw, to compare Federer to Roddick is a slap in the face to him. He's won 7 grand slams. Also, Roddick has declined since first playing Federer. He used to play some really great tennis.

I'd say the real insult is by Nadal fans comparing Nadal to Federer and saying he's better than Federer and has no rivals. Nadal hasn't proven much yet. 7 grand slams proves something. 1 grand slam and a slew of victories on clay doesn't prove much.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:08 PM
Thanks for your fair and balanced perspective.:p

Thank you, it is nice to get recognized for the hard work I do on my posts to come up with intelligent, balanced, and fair arguments, something Federer fans could learn from classy people like us.

arky-tennis
05-26-2006, 06:08 PM
must watch fox news....

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:13 PM
draculie,

It's a smack i nthe face to Federer to say there isn't a rivalry with Nadal.

He's the second best player on clay, and getting better. As the last match showed -- despite the fanatical claims of Nadal fans -- is that they're essentially even.

Oh, that's also the opinion of Rod Laver. I think he knows a little more about tennis than you do. Just a guess. Laver thinks Federer doesn't need to do much to beat Nadal other than what he's already done.

Oh, btw, to compare Federer to Roddick is a slap in the face to him. He's won 7 grand slams. Also, Roddick has declined since first playing Federer. He used to play some really great tennis.

I'd say the real insult is by Nadal fans comparing Nadal to Federer and saying he's better than Federer and has no rivals. Nadal hasn't proven much yet. 7 grand slams proves something. 1 grand slam and a slew of victories on clay doesn't prove much.

You are a Federer-fanatic troll, stop your nastiness and poor arguments.

Nadal and Federer essentialy even on clay, do you even know what essentialy even is or are those words too hard for somebody like you and that is why you use them out of context. Nadal has won the last 5 Masters Events or GRAND SLAMS he has played on clay, Federer has won only 1 in Hamburg last year, when Nadal did not even play the event. How dare you call Nadal and Federer essentialy even on clay, Nadal has beaten Federer three times in a row on clay, Federer has ZERO wins over Nadal on clay, did you hear that, ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO, so stop your lies, they arent even close to even on clay, Nadal wins every big title, every match between them, stop being a trolling Federer fanatic, you are really making me mad.

Anybody saying Federer does not have to anything different to beat Nadal is an idiot, if that is Rod Laver then he is an idiot too, I dont care how many slams he won, he is obviously an old man whose brain is rotting who needs to stop watching tennis if he really thinks that. Nadal beats Federer every single time, obviously Federer has to do different to beat Nadal, if he didnt he would win sometimes, Federer never wins over Nadal, Nadal just keeps winning over and over again. How stupid to say Federer does not have to do anything to beat Nadal, if Laver really did say that he must be so old his brain is rotted and he should go to the old folks home.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:14 PM
I'm guessing having match points and 5th set tiebreakers don't mean anything anymore...

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:15 PM
I'm guessing having match points and 5th set tiebreakers don't mean anything anymore...

No they dont, all that matters is who wins the matches. Nadal wins the matches, Federer does not. Who cares about anything else, stop making excuses all you Federer fanatic trolls, you just make yourself look silly and desperate.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:17 PM
Well the politeness didn't last long...And how is that an excuse, btw I'm a HEWITT fan not a Federer fan, get your facts straight ;) .

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:21 PM
It is an excuse because it is a loss, and all Federer can do against Nadal is loss. So sayin things like oh he was so close, oh he was not lucky, oh it could ahve gone either way, oh he was one point from winning, who cares, all that matters is Nadal wins every match they play in over a year now and all three this year and all three on clay. When Federer actually beats Nadal, actually change that if he beats him more then once, maybe I will give Federer a bit of credit to be a bit of a rival to my Nadal, but until then you are all a bunch of whiny excuse makers. Lose, lose, lose, lose, that is all there is, for Nadal win, win, win, win. Excuses excuses Nadal owns Federer, suck it up until your precious washed up Federer proves me wrong, which he has done nothing to do you Fed fanatics.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:24 PM
No they dont, all that matters is who wins the matches. Nadal wins the matches, Federer does not. Who cares about anything else, stop making excuses all you Federer fanatic trolls, you just make yourself look silly and desperate.

I'm a Nadal fan, but I'm not as overcrazed as you. I do consider Federer a rival because their matches are a test of two wills. Like two rams butting heads. The same ram may win over and over again, but what happens when the other ram gets its revenge. What happens if Federer is up 10 - 5 to nadal.. and half of Roger's wins are on clay agaisnt Nadal.

Earlier, someone made a great point. How can you call Blake a rival of Nadal. If Blake is up 2-0 on Nadal, there is no such thing as fluking twice.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:26 PM
It is an excuse because it is a loss, and all Federer can do against Nadal is loss. So sayin things like oh he was so close, oh he was not lucky, oh it could ahve gone either way, oh he was one point from winning, who cares, all that matters is Nadal wins every match they play in over a year now and all three this year and all three on clay. When Federer actually beats Nadal, actually change that if he beats him more then once, maybe I will give Federer a bit of credit to be a bit of a rival to my Nadal, but until then you are all a bunch of whiny excuse makers. Lose, lose, lose, lose, that is all there is, for Nadal win, win, win, win. Excuses excuses Nadal owns Federer, suck it up until your precious washed up Federer proves me wrong, which he has done nothing to do you Fed fanatics.

Omglolroflmaowtfbbq LOL!!! Man you are pretty funny ever thought of being a stand up comic? Btw I see a record of 3-0 Hewitt to Nadal I think I should start a thread of Hewitt winning the grand slam now :rolleyes: .

Seriously, take a deep breath and just relax no one who has posted is a Fed fanatic but your posts may make even the most hardcore Rafa fans convert.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:27 PM
It is an excuse because it is a loss, and all Federer can do against Nadal is loss. So sayin things like oh he was so close, oh he was not lucky, oh it could ahve gone either way, oh he was one point from winning, who cares, all that matters is Nadal wins every match they play in over a year now and all three this year and all three on clay. When Federer actually beats Nadal, actually change that if he beats him more then once, maybe I will give Federer a bit of credit to be a bit of a rival to my Nadal, but until then you are all a bunch of whiny excuse makers. Lose, lose, lose, lose, that is all there is, for Nadal win, win, win, win. Excuses excuses Nadal owns Federer, suck it up until your precious washed up Federer proves me wrong, which he has done nothing to do you Fed fanatics.

I don't recall Nadal beating Blake.

BabolatFan
05-26-2006, 06:27 PM
Federer needs to beat Nalbandian more. Interestingly, Nalbandian is leading 6-5 in their past meetings.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:28 PM
I'm a Nadal fan, but I'm not as overcrazed as you. I do consider Federer a rival because their matches are a test of two wills. Like two rams butting heads. The same ram may win over and over again, but what happens when the other ram gets its revenge. What happens if Federer is up 10 - 5 to nadal.. and half of Roger's wins are on clay agaisnt Nadal.

Earlier, someone made a great point. How can you call Blake a rival of Nadal. If Blake is up 2-0 on Nadal, there is no such thing as fluking twice.

You must be some idiot if you are a Nadal fan and say this. Who cares if Nadal wins everytime if they are like two rams, what kind of a dumb statement is that to make. It all matters who wins, Nadal wins everytime, I dont care if they are two rams or two horses, Nadal wins the match and the trophy if it is a final, and roger goes home after losing the match to Nadal, that is all that matters.

As for revenge, tell me this when Roger gets a revenge on Nadal, right now there is no revenge, there is no proof of this, this is just stupid talk, you are talking about stuff that does not happen and has not happened so it means nothing. All that means anything is Nadal beating Federer over and over and over and over again, that is all that matters, not two rams, not revenge which has never happened yet, just Nadal always wins.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:30 PM
I notice that you have avoided my Blake/Hewitt arguments, what exactly do you have to say about those?

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:30 PM
Omglolroflmaowtfbbq LOL!!! Man you are pretty funny ever thought of being a stand up comic? Btw I see a record of 3-0 Hewitt to Nadal I think I should start a thread of Hewitt winning the grand slam now :rolleyes: .

Seriously, take a deep breath and just relax no one who has posted is a Fed fanatic but your posts may make even the most hardcore Rafa fans convert.

All cute Rafael's matches with loser Hewitt were while Rafael was an up and comer. Since he came into his peak in March of last year he has not played Hewitt. So they are really 0-0 and Nadal will crush Hewitt anytime they play from now on. So that is a dumb example.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:30 PM
You must be some idiot if you are a Nadal fan and say this. Who cares if Nadal wins everytime if they are like two rams, what kind of a dumb statement is that to make. It all matters who wins, Nadal wins everytime, I dont care if they are two rams or two horses, Nadal wins the match and the trophy if it is a final, and roger goes home after losing the match to Nadal, that is all that matters.

As for revenge, tell me this when Roger gets a revenge on Nadal, right now there is no revenge, there is no proof of this, this is just stupid talk, you are talking about stuff that does not happen and has not happened so it means nothing. All that means anything is Nadal beating Federer over and over and over and over again, that is all that matters, not two rams, not revenge which has never happened yet, just Nadal always wins.

I like the way your ignoring the Blake situation. I am a Nadal fan, but I can't stand hardcore OMG I LOVE NADAL HE IS SO GREAT LALALALALA fans. It's just stupid

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:30 PM
I don't recall Nadal beating Blake.

They only played twice, not enough to say Nadal is no rival to Blake, they have to play more and Nadal keep losing for that to be true.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:34 PM
All cute Rafael's matches with loser Hewitt were while Rafael was an up and comer. Since he came into his peak in March of last year he has not played Hewitt. So they are really 0-0 and Nadal will crush Hewitt anytime they play from now on. So that is a dumb example.

If I recall correctly Nadal was a favorite at the Aussie Open 2005 after winning Davis Cup for Spain, he was no longer just an "up and comer" by then he was a legitamite contender, he lost fair and square to "loser Hewitt" who happened to reach the finals, so please no excuses the fact is Hewitt 3 Nadal 0, that's the argument you're trying to make us beleive correct?

Aeropro joe
05-26-2006, 06:35 PM
All cute Rafael's matches with loser Hewitt were while Rafael was an up and comer. Since he came into his peak in March of last year he has not played Hewitt. So they are really 0-0 and Nadal will crush Hewitt anytime they play from now on. So that is a dumb example.
you dont start the rivalry over just because nadal matured and got better completely and utterly farse.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:36 PM
If I recall correctly Nadal was a favorite at the Aussie Open 2005 after winning Davis Cup for Spain, he was no longer just an "up and comer" by then he was a legitamite contender, he lost fair and square to "loser Hewitt" who happened to reach the finals, so please no excuses the fact is Hewitt 3 Nadal 0!!!!!! :mrgreen: Of course I'm being facetious in my last sentence if you can't tell.

My cute Nadal wasnt even ranked in the top 30 at that Australian Open, how stupid to say he was expected to beat World 3 Hewitt in Australia just because he won Davis Cup on clay vs the U.S. He was not considered a legitimate contender until he reached the Lipton finals in March, and almost beating Roger who he never lost to again of course. He was not supposed to even come close to beating Hewitt in Australia, but still almost beat him, his peak wasnt started for another few months still. They have not played since Nadal was a real contender, it is 0-0 and if they play again Nadal will crush loser Hewitt.

drakulie
05-26-2006, 06:40 PM
draculie,

It's a smack i nthe face to Federer to say there isn't a rivalry with Nadal.

Oh, btw, to compare Federer to Roddick is a slap in the face to him. He's won 7 grand slams. Also, Roddick has declined since first playing Federer. He used to play some really great tennis.

You obviously do not comprehend what you read. Go back and read my post. I never compared Roddick to Federer. I said people use to talk about the "FEDERER-RODDICK" rivalry, like if there actually was one, when in fact there was none because Federer consistently kicked Roddicks behind. Therefore, there was NO RIVALRY!!!

Secondly, I don't care how many match points Federer has had against Nadal recently or how "close" he has come to beating Nadal. Until he is able to win a match point against him he is going to continue being on the losing end. Until that happens----there is no Rivalry. Same as when Federer and Roddick played.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:40 PM
My cute Nadal wasnt even ranked in the top 30 at that Australian Open, how stupid to say he was expected to beat World 3 Hewitt in Australia just because he won Davis Cup on clay vs the U.S. He was not considered a legitimate contender until he reached the Lipton finals in March, and almost beating Roger who he never lost to again of course. He was not supposed to even come close to beating Hewitt in Australia, but still almost beat him, his peak wasnt started for another few months still. They have not played since Nadal was a real contender, it is 0-0 and if they play again Nadal will crush loser Hewitt.

So lets say Federer "matures" into a better clay courter.. are you gonna restart the match up again? If Federer beats Nadal in the final, your going to say thats a fluke right?

Breaker
05-26-2006, 06:43 PM
No he was definitely a favorite at the Aussie Open, Hewitt was expected to lose early as he always had previously there, it wouldn't have been a surprise if Nadal won but Hewitt pulled it out. And the record is 3-0 not 0-0 I don't care if Nadal wasn't matured by then, does that mean Federer's record against Hewitt is really 9-0? No, it's 12-7 don't make these excuses for Nadal, fact is, he has not beaten Hewitt or Blake and still consistantly loses to much lower ranked players on hard courts, he is not as dominant as you think he is.

aramis
05-26-2006, 06:44 PM
Hewitt-Ferrero
These two have incredible matches, and if you ask me, their matches are more enternaining than Fed Nadal matches. I just saw the 02 Masters Cup final and I have not seen such exciting tennis in recent years. Their rallies are usually very long and they pull each other really wide off the court. Also, unlike some of the rivalries listed above, this one is independent of surface. I've seen them play on clay, grass, hard, and indoor and the match is always intense.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:45 PM
No, it's 12-7 don't make these excuses for Nadal, fact is, he has not beaten Hewitt or Blake and still consistantly loses to much lower ranked players on hard courts, he is not as dominant as you think he is.

Agreed

bethbrasil
05-26-2006, 06:45 PM
My Dear friends,;)

I regret by the Clement's Contusion, it is always very bad when a tennis player hurts.

However are not going to have all the French fans against my IDOL.

I already passed week praying for ROGI, and my angels are already there with him in Paris. I know that all of us form a great chain of positive thought and with great energy to be with him all the time.
I WILL CHEER TOO MUCH.

Million kisses, much fondness and love for you. Beth:D

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:47 PM
So lets say Federer "matures" into a better clay courter.. are you gonna restart the match up again? If Federer beats Nadal in the final, your going to say thats a fluke right?

Federer is an old 24 year old, Nadal is a young and bright 19 year old. you dont mature into your own compared to a 19 year old as an old 24 year old, that does not make sense, so of course that woudl not be the case.

If Federer beats Nadal in the final of the French, did you honestly even think that, omigod, Haha that was so ridiculous, I cant believe you said that, oh you should be ashamed of yourself, maybe Nahalie Tauziat comes back and beats Henin Harpenne in the French Open final, that makes as much sense.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:49 PM
No he was definitely a favorite at the Aussie Open, Hewitt was expected to lose early as he always had previously there, it wouldn't have been a surprise if Nadal won but Hewitt pulled it out. And the record is 3-0 not 0-0 I don't care if Nadal wasn't matured by then, does that mean Federer's record against Hewitt is really 9-0? No, it's 12-7 don't make these excuses for Nadal, fact is, he has not beaten Hewitt or Blake and still consistantly loses to much lower ranked players on hard courts, he is not as dominant as you think he is.

I already said Hewitt is a loser, the only reason Federer has so many slams is he played losers like Hewitt and ***got Roddick. If he played real people like Nadal he would not have so many titles.

I have no problem if you wipe out all of Hewit's early wins over Roger before he matured to start 2004 and give their head to head 9-0. I dont think Roger and Hewitt have a rivalry either, so go ahead, I dont have a problem with that, it is not like having no rivarly with loser hewitt and ***got Roddick is a big deal.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:49 PM
Federer is an old 24 year old, Nadal is a young and bright 19 year old. you dont mature into your own compared to a 19 year old as an old 24 year old, that does not make sense, so of course that woudl not be the case.

If Federer beats Nadal in the final of the French, did you honestly even think that, omigod, Haha that was so ridiculous, I cant believe you said that, oh you should be ashamed of yourself, maybe Nahalie Tauziat comes back and beats Henin Harpenne in the French Open final, that makes as much sense.
In their last final, they went 5 sets! Federer is much closer to Nadal on clay as opposed to last year. Your the who is naive.

Aeropro joe
05-26-2006, 06:54 PM
I already said Hewitt is a loser, the only reason Federer has so many slams is he played losers like Hewitt and ***got Roddick. If he played real people like Nadal he would not have so many titles.

I have no problem if you wipe out all of Hewit's early wins over Roger before he matured to start 2004 and give their head to head 9-0. I dont think Roger and Hewitt have a rivalry either, so go ahead, I dont have a problem with that, it is not like having no rivarly with loser hewitt and ***got Roddick is a big deal.
now because you cant come up with a valid arguement you are attacking roddick's sexuality? which is completley false by the way, as he dates hot chicks all the time.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 06:55 PM
now because you cant come up with a valid arguement you are attacking roddick's sexuality? which is completley false by the way, as he dates hot chicks all the time.

You've noticed that too?

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:56 PM
In their last final, they went 5 sets! Federer is much closer to Nadal on clay as opposed to last year. Your the who is naive.

Who cares how many sets they go, my sweet Nadal wins each match, that is all that matters, if you lose a running race by .07 to the same person each time you dont get a gold medal because you were so close, you lose the race and the medal everytime. Nadal takes the gold each time he plays Roger, that is all that peple remember, Nadal raising his arms in triumph, loser Roger who is 5 years old crying on the sidelines that he cant beat a kid 5 years younger then him ever since his game is too weak to ever beat him again.

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 06:57 PM
now because you cant come up with a valid arguement you are attacking roddick's sexuality? which is completley false by the way, as he dates hot chicks all the time.

Roddick always looks like he wants to kiss a cute guy at the net. he is a ***got sorry, he should be ashamed of himself disgracing society by being a ***got.

Aeropro joe
05-26-2006, 06:57 PM
yea i mean nadalgirl has yet to present a case with valid points that any ring of truth in them and has now resorted to attacking us with childish names and roddicks sexual orientation

Aeropro joe
05-26-2006, 06:59 PM
Roddick always looks like he wants to kiss a cute guy at the net. he is a ***got sorry, he should be ashamed of himself disgracing society by being a ***got.
what are you talking about? ur claiming his sexual orientation by the way he appears at the net? where are the mods @?

nadalgirl26
05-26-2006, 07:00 PM
You guys are no fun, and are not nice people, nice caring people who makes good arguments. I am leaving after tonight. You have harassed and made fun of me and my favorite player and wont give him any credit. I hate you all, and after tongith I am never coming back here again except to make fun of you all when Nadal wins everything else this year to win the last 3 slams and go for the GRAND SLAM in Australia this year.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 07:01 PM
Who cares how many sets they go, my sweet Nadal wins each match, that is all that matters, if you lose a running race by .07 to the same person each time you dont get a gold medal because you were so close, you lose the race and the medal everytime. Nadal takes the gold each time he plays Roger, that is all that peple remember, Nadal raising his arms in triumph, loser Roger who is 5 years old crying on the sidelines that he cant beat a kid 5 years younger then him ever since his game is too weak to ever beat him again.

Age has nothing to do with playing ability.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 07:01 PM
I already said Hewitt is a loser, the only reason Federer has so many slams is he played losers like Hewitt and ***got Roddick. If he played real people like Nadal he would not have so many titles.

I have no problem if you wipe out all of Hewit's early wins over Roger before he matured to start 2004 and give their head to head 9-0. I dont think Roger and Hewitt have a rivalry either, so go ahead, I dont have a problem with that, it is not like having no rivarly with loser hewitt and ***got Roddick is a big deal.

Obviously you have lost your argument so I'm done arguing with you continue rambling on if you must because that's all you're really doing anyways.

I agree with the Hewitt/Ferrero matchup they seem to bring each other up a level for truly enjoyable play, the speed, touch, and angles just brings every point into a special place in your mind that you don't want to forget. Add on Hewitt/Agassi to that list, I love watching their matchups, like at the SAP Open a few years back and at Cincy also a few years back.

Rob the Tennis Player
05-26-2006, 07:02 PM
You guys are no fun, and are not nice people, nice caring people who makes good arguments. I am leaving after tonight. You have harassed and made fun of me and my favorite player and wont give him any credit. I hate you all, and after tongith I am never coming back here again except to make fun of you all when Nadal wins everything else this year to win the last 3 slams and go for the GRAND SLAM in Australia this year.

And she called us childish.

Breaker
05-26-2006, 07:03 PM
You guys are no fun, and are not nice people, nice caring people who makes good arguments. I am leaving after tonight. You have harassed and made fun of me and my favorite player and wont give him any credit. I hate you all, and after tongith I am never coming back here again except to make fun of you all when Nadal wins everything else this year to win the last 3 slams and go for the GRAND SLAM in Australia this year.

Ok have fun we'll miss you.

Aeropro joe
05-26-2006, 07:09 PM
ok enjoy your life just jeave me outta it, have fun watching nadal play and maybe one day you will marry him

Andres
05-26-2006, 08:53 PM
Kind of agree with Kabob190. Federer beats Blake, Blake beats Nadal, Nadal beats Federer.
Let's add Hewitt to the mix :D
Federer beats Blake, Blake beats Nadal, Nadal beats Federer, Hewitt crushes Nadal, Federer CRUSHES Hewitt, Hewitt CRUSHES Blake.

And Goran is GOD :D

armand
05-26-2006, 10:07 PM
You guys are no fun, and are not nice people, nice caring people who makes good arguments. I am leaving after tonight. You have harassed and made fun of me and my favorite player and wont give him any credit. I hate you all, and after tongith I am never coming back here again except to make fun of you all when Nadal wins everything else this year to win the last 3 slams and go for the GRAND SLAM in Australia this year.I guess that means you're never coming back. Thank god, because you really made me start hating Nadal.

superman1
05-26-2006, 10:37 PM
Ain't it the truth. I've always enjoyed watching Nadal play, but after this Nadal-mania, I'm a bit sick of him. When he starts losing a couple matches here and there, his "fan" base will plummet.