Federer Facing Nadal

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by bladepdb, Sep 16, 2009.

  1. bladepdb

    bladepdb Professional

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    870
    Ironic how Fed lost the two hard court slams of the year while he's considered one of the best hard-courters of all time, right?

    Even more interesting how he lost 6-2 in the fifth set of BOTH hardcourt finals, right?

    Yep, at Flushing Meadow Fed was facing none other than a Nadal across the net, reminiscent of the first slam of the year. JMDP showed the fight and spirit of the man he defeated the day before to defeat one of the greatest of all time at the finals. Fed could do nothing but be awed by the performance and buckle under the pressure of pursuing the ever-elusive sixth consecutive GS title.
     
    #1
  2. ArrowSmith

    ArrowSmith Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    Fed has 8 hardcourt slams the most in history. He also has the 56 in a row on hardcourts streak. You fail.
     
    #2
  3. AlexTennisAllDayLong

    AlexTennisAllDayLong Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    188
    federer dominated hard courts since he started, this year doesn't even matter, even if he don't win a hard court next 2 years he still be the best of all time, he don't even have a problem getting into every final, that counts for something
     
    #3
  4. ArrowSmith

    ArrowSmith Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    Now he's 8-2 in hardcourt slam finals. 8-0 during his prime which is all that counts.
     
    #4
  5. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,853
    edit wrong thread
     
    #5
  6. prosealster

    prosealster Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    949
    major fail thread :(
     
    #6
  7. Cyan

    Cyan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,372
    Actually, Fed is the best HC player of all time since he has won more HC slams than any other player ever....
     
    #7
  8. bladepdb

    bladepdb Professional

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    870
    The mark of a champion is not how he performs during his prime, it is how he performs at the end of his career. Those who finish weak cannot be considered champions.

    That says it all.
     
    #8
  9. msc886

    msc886 Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    961
    This is not exactly the end of his career so we can't really make a conclusion based on that.
     
    #9
  10. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,477
    Why is that?. If anything a champion is defined by what he accomplished in his career. Not how he performed at the end of his career.

    Every single champion finished weak including Sampras.Dont for one moment think that just becuase Sampras retired winning a USopen title, he finished strong. In fact Sampras had to wait almost two years for his last slam.

    Applying your logic, if someone at the end of their career (marat Safin, santaro, etc) win a slam and retire -- that is considered mark of a champion and they now become greater than they were during their career?
     
    #10
  11. dropshot winner

    dropshot winner Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,852
    So what you're saying is that Nadal cannot be considered a champion if he were to struggle as a 28 year old?
     
    #11
  12. P_Agony

    P_Agony Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    13,186
    DP outplayed Federer in most of the match, Nadal didn't.
    DP has won more overall points than Federer, Nadal didn't.
    Fed choked away the AO final, in the USO he played badly against a red hot opponent.
     
    #12
  13. ceberus

    ceberus Guest

    Senseless topic.
     
    #13
  14. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,996
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    Sure it says your a complete moron.

    Even if it was the end of his career do you consider 2 GS finals and 1 MS shield weak?

    You really are that stupid I guess.
     
    #14
  15. Rhinosaur

    Rhinosaur Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    259
    Your opinion is about as weak as the original post...and that's saying something!
     
    #15
  16. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    Oh no! So obviously according to your dumb logic Sampras is awful on grass because he could never make a final after 2000 and Lendl is just down right disgusting on clay because he never won a french open in his 30s and lets not even start on how bad Agassi is at the Aussie because he just stopped winning them too. Oh no its obvious if you stop winning slams you are awful! Besides last I checked Fed is still playing...and the only player I know to ever retire after winning a slam was Pete Sampras. Even Laver, Borg, Tilden, Lendl, Agassi etc. all went out on losing notes..so did they suck too?
     
    #16
  17. dukemunson

    dukemunson Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    278
    Truly one of the dumbest quotes I've read on this board...well...in awhile at least...it makes absolutely no sense...
     
    #17
  18. Agassifan

    Agassifan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,509
    Dumb ass post of the year.

    If fed were to finish his career now, he would've made the finals of the last 7 slams while completing the french-wimbledon double.
     
    #18
  19. TheMusicLover

    TheMusicLover Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    Messages:
    7,772
    Location:
    Nexus Polaris
    Thought I'd seen it ALL by now, but this really takes the cake in blatant silliness. :shock:
     
    #19
  20. el sergento

    el sergento Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,185
    Location:
    Montreal
    Yup, especially when it comes to your logic, your quote absolutely says it all, really leaves nothing to the imagination. :evil:
     
    #20
  21. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,708
    Location:
    England
    Federer has won 5 US Opens in a row, and 3 Australian Opens. Every player loses some matches. What's your point?
     
    #21
  22. Mkie7

    Mkie7 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    398
    Your logic is so flawed.. Hope you are not a college student. Its like taking one paragraph of a book and interpreating it. Great job! :) Who care about Nadal being on the other side of the net.... Fed. had a better qualified opponent who deserved to be there. GSs are not about Nadal or Federer... its about the best players making it to the finals and winning it.
     
    #22
  23. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    looks like blade ran away from this topic
     
    #23
  24. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,834
    Location:
    New York City
    There's no irony at all actually. It's only ironic if you waste your time arguing with people on this forum. Then you'd have a skewed perception of reality altogether.
     
    #24
  25. dysonlu

    dysonlu Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,001
    The irony is that your username is bladepdb but you don't seem to be very sharp.
     
    #25
  26. DjordjeRosic

    DjordjeRosic Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    266
    ^^^ZING!!!
    :grin::grin::grin:

    -Djordje
     
    #26
  27. BorisBeckerFan

    BorisBeckerFan Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,164
    This is one of the definitions of Irony according to dictionary.com:

    an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.

    Since Federer has won the most HC slams and was by many expected to win, including myself, it is ironic that he lost.

    Sadly Federer did buckle in the fith set both times.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2009
    #27
  28. BorisBeckerFan

    BorisBeckerFan Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,164
    Maybe english is not your first language, and if so I understand since it is not my first language, but there is actually a lot of irony in him losing.
     
    #28
  29. Carsomyr

    Carsomyr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,198
    Location:
    Winesburg, Ohio
    :-| .......
     
    #29
  30. DMan

    DMan Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    922
    Um, Federer wasn't facing Nadal in the finals of the US Open. You see, Nadal FAILED...AGAIN...to reach just one US Open final. As for Federer, he's been in 6 consecutive US Open finals! Nadal won 6 games in his semifinal appearance. You see, Fed has had to win 6 matches to get to 6 consecutive US Open finals. Not win a mere 6 games!

    And shame on Roger, for not winning his 6th consecutive in a major! How horrible of him. Now please, tell me the names of another man who has won 6 consecutive majors? Nadal is most certainly not on that list!
     
    #30

Share This Page