"He's the greatest but I'm the best "

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by The Dark Knight, Jun 11, 2013.

  1. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,104
    But Nadal went through Federer in the semi's before facing Puerta that has to count for something more than what Fed did in WIM03. Let's not forget Puerta was juicing as well so he was a lot more tougher to beat than he normally would've been.

    Saying Fed had to deal with Nadal as he aged is correct, except, he couldn't deal with him even when he was in his peak and Nadal was a teen and that includes on a HC. The only HC victory Fed got over Rafa excluding YEC was Miami 05, a match which he would not have won if Rafa wasn't playing in his first Masters final and got tight after going up 2 sets and a break.

    Fed couldn't deal with Nadal in WIM08 or AO09, both majors on a surface favouring Federer.

    Again, completely ignoring Nadal's SF opponent in RG13. Kiefer was Fed's SF opponent in AO06.

    Regardless of your arguments, the truth still stands that Nadal would've won WIM11 if he had to face Philippoussis, USO11 if he had to face Hewitt and AO12 if he had to face Baghdatis.

    He doesn't have to reach Federer's grass and HC achievements, but if he can win Wimbledon a couple more times and add another AO and USO he will most likely add 2 more RG titles before he retires. I don't like his chances of doing it all because he's injury prone and Djokovic is a tough task at the AO and USO but it is possible for him.

    Federer won 4 AO titles and never had to beat anyone of Nadal or Novak's calibre to do it. The one time he had an opportunity to take out an opponent playing at an extremely high level, he failed - Safin 05. Nadal will not have this luxury because Murray is a tough customer at AO, made many finals and of course there's Novak who is the king down under.

    Federer also almost went out to a 34 year old Agassi in USO04 and tbh didn't really play well against an even older and more fatigued Agassi in the final in USO05. If Nadal had those USO04 and USO05 draws that Fed had he would be winning the USO this year and next, we all know that only Murray, Novak or an on fire Del Potro will be big obstacles for him, all of which were not around from 04-06 where Fed racked up 6 titles. In 07 and 08 they were both in their first slam final.
     
    #51
  2. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    14,337
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Yes but Federer is just Nadal's Turkey remember? You love reminding the board of that. Puetra wasn't banned for that long because the amount of PED's in his system weren't enough to boost his performance apparently. Federer beat the soon to be world #1 Roddick in the semi final, Roddick is obviously very good on grass. My point was mainly that there was nothing to scoff at regarding Federer's 03 WIM win.

    The AO doesn't favour Federer, it's a slow high bouncing court. That helps Rafa more than Federer. Those two matches could have gone either way, Federer choked in both of them. Federer has always struggled with him, the surfaces they've played on largely favour Rafa though. It was it is, you like to flaunt Rafa beating Roger on hards when he was young gun but then say "he wasn't that good on hardcourts - weak era". So which is it? Either Rafa has an xfactor which means he handles Roger better than he should compared to the field or Rafa was actually a very good hardcourter. I think it's a mix of both.

    And Jürgen Melzer was Rafa's semi final opponent at the FO 2010. Sorry but Nadal has had dud's in his draws too. 2006 AO wasn't a strong tournament but it's hardly much worse than some of Rafa's, Federer's form in that event wasn't stella either.

    We'll never know if he would have won those majors, I could easily argue that Federer at his peak would have beaten Djokovic at Wimbledon 2011 and the USO 2011.

    I agree that Nadal can increase his tally at the other slams to bring his resume up to 'GOAT' standards. He's very capable of that. But Federer is still overall a better player on grass and hards until Rafa reaches something close to Federer's numbers.

    Federer's 04 AO draw had a lot of depth, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero and Safin in a row is a strong draw.

    Agassi at the USO 2004 was playing very well, he had won Cinncinati and had the crowd support plus windy conditions behind him. Not convinced anything but the best incarnation of Rafa would have beaten him. Federer's form at the USO 05 wasn't the best no. Still it's all hypotheticals to say Rafa would go through Federer's 2004 and 2005 draws this year and next ;). You think Nadal's 2010 draw was harder than Federer's 2004 draw? I'd take Agassi and 04 Hewitt over Djokovic coming off a 5 setter after beating his first top 10 player of the year.
     
    #52
  3. ScottleeSV

    ScottleeSV Professional

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    905
    Rafael Nadal....

    - Has five fewer majors than Roger Federer

    - Has never won the World Tour Finals

    - Has never won Miami, Shanghai, Cinncinati, or Paris

    - Has won in fewer Masters venues than his rivals. Nadal has won in 6 venues, Federer in 7, and Djokovic 8. Heavy emphasis on Rome and Monte Carlo much?

    - Has the worst record in hard court masters events amongst his peers. Nadal has 6 masters wins on hard courts, compared to Murray (9), Djokovic (10), Federer (15).

    - Has only ever won 1 indoor tournament

    - Has a losing record in major finals against his generational rival (2-3 v Djokovic)

    - Has spent nearly four less years at No 1 than Roger Federer. FOUR.

    ---

    See how it easy it is to make an argument for your own gains?
     
    #53
  4. qwertre

    qwertre Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    274
    I don't understand why you don't like the ranking system. The whole point is that the Grand Slams should not be the only measuring system for ranking. If that was the case, rankings would fluctuate so wildly that it would be impossible to even have a ranking system! Consistent success is the measure of the ranking system. It's true and right that if you don't play in two majors plus the Olympics, you should drop in the rankings! The little tournaments that you speak of are what makes the pro game so successful. It's true that it's about money, but the pros aren't playing the sport for fun and glory, it's for the money! Without those small tournaments, the pro game wouldn't survive, and they should be worth points to reflect that!

    Your examples are a little bit off. Marcelos Rios won 7 titles and made the Aussie final in his #1 year. Boris Becker won two Majors in '89, but Lendl won 10 tournaments, including the Australian Open, made the Wimbledon Final, and made a fourth round and a semi. Their resumes were almost identical, except Becker won one more final and won fewer overall titles. That makes their season very close, but Lendl stayed ahead.
     
    #54
  5. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,189
    Federer is the more versatile player.

    5 AO finals
    5 RG finals
    8 Wimbledon finals
    6 USO finals
    8 Year–End Championship finals

    Nadal has:

    2 AO finals
    8 RG finals
    5 Wimbledon finals
    2 USO finals
    1 Year–End Championship final


    32 vs 18 finals.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2013
    #55
  6. chandu612

    chandu612 Guest

    Listen to what Sampras says here
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=M7IUqFjNrMM#t=2520s

    Btw..this video is from 2012

    Also hear to Sampras at 43:30
     
    #56
  7. chandu612

    chandu612 Guest

    Listen to what Sampras says here
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...FjNrMM#t=2520s

    Btw..this video is from 2012

    Also listen to Sampras at 43:30
     
    #57
  8. Egoista

    Egoista Professional

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,285
    Greatest up for debate to a degree.....overall most give it to Fed.

    However, most talented with consistent performances Fed.

    Until players are subjected to a biological passport I would hold off on the comparisons. Some of our heroes would be found to have feet of clay.
     
    #58
  9. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Yeah so ? Did he not say what my signature says?

    Yes he did . So why is it a lie?

    He said this way before he was buddies with Fed and did all those exhibitions with him . Now suddenly he says something different ?

    What happened to everything he said before? Should we all pretend like he never said it ?
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2013
    #59
  10. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Then why does he constantly lose to Nadal ?

    It seems illogical ....he is the greatest and most talented but can't beat Nadal???

    Doesn't make sense .

    Who the hell wants to be the greatest if it means you lose?

    This is a mad mad world

    Up is down and down is up ??! It's whacky .
     
    #60
  11. Egoista

    Egoista Professional

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,285
    for a tennis player not at all hard to understand or "get"

    Quite childish not to understand different games match up differently.

    Nadals FH feds BH

    everybody knows this.

    Let them play 10 times around the world with 3 HC 3 grass 3 clay (to make it fair) and one indoors lets see who wins.

    5 yr gap.

    Obviously he is the most talented universally accepted.

    And for someone with so much talent to actually have capitalized on it is special as opposed to say Marat Safin.....who had 70 percent of feds talent but did not achieve 70% of his results.
     
    #61
  12. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    4 year age difference .

    Borg mcenroe 3 year

    Borg Lendl 8 year.

    So why has this not occurred before?

    Face it .....fed had subpar competition
     
    #62
  13. Nitish

    Nitish Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    901
    Get your facts right the difference was 4 years
    and lendl was 20-21 when he faced borg so guess he was still a baby(your logic).
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2013
    #63
  14. chandu612

    chandu612 Guest

    Well I am saying Sampras still believes in what you say in your signature.
     
    #64
  15. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Nitish I'm not quite sure what you are "nitishpicking" on

    But the bottom line is that the difference in age between Fedal has occurred many times before and never before has their been such a lopsided slam record.....never .


    And the question therefore again is why?

    The clear explanation is because the competition was subpar. It's a legitimate and logical point . Whether or not you like it.
     
    #65
  16. ScottleeSV

    ScottleeSV Professional

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    905
    Really? I would have thought it was this..

    Clay court meetings = 15
    grass = 3
    indoor hard = 4

    Oh, and that age thing.
     
    #66
  17. mike danny

    mike danny Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,222
    yes agree but this video was in march 2012. before federer won his 7th wimbledon title and reclaiming world no.1 against "these guys"
     
    #67
  18. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    No out of Nadals slam wins almost half came on non clay.....3 out of 8 to be exact.

    Indoor hard is not a slam surface ( unless AO roof closes).

    So 2 can play at this game . Take grass out of the equation and Nadal leads in slams 7-0.

    Fed got nothing else except beating up on a kid in the early stages of his career.
     
    #68
  19. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    TDK,

    It's almost a 5 year difference. Rafa is 27 and Fed will be 32 very soon, in a month or two
     
    #69
  20. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    That's it. Nothing more needs to be said. This post is unarguable.
     
    #70
  21. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    Looks like he had changed his mind three years later. That makes this article obsolete.
     
    #71
  22. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Yes I listened very carefully, and he does say Fed 'has to figure out a way how to beat these guys' at 43:30 (and I'm guessing 'these guys' are Nadal,Djokovic and Murray). He never says that Fed 'must ultimately earn a winning career record against rival Rafael Nadal to be considered the greatest player of all time', like TDK copied out of an article. So his words were twisted in this article TDK cooy pasted out of some Swedish guys' blog or something.

    Thanks BTW for sharing that video, it was a pleasure to see the footage and to hear (again) that Fed is the GOAT out of the mouth of all those greats of the game and experts.
     
    #72
  23. chandu612

    chandu612 Guest

    Yes you can quote if Sampras or McEnroe changed their view after Fed 17th title. For now we are stating what they said last
     
    #73
  24. chandu612

    chandu612 Guest

    At 42:00 he does say its a valid argument.
    Yeah its also refreshing to see experts saying h2h is very important and we have to re-do this list after Nadal is done.
     
    #74
  25. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    No, he says it's a somewhat valid argument. Just like the guy from that article TDK refers to in his signature, you also twist words in your advantage.

    And you think experts telling to re-do the list after Nadal is done is 'refreshing'?They are just playing Captain Obvious!!! And the same thing applies to Federer, he's not done yet and like Mike Danny said;
    So if you asked Sampras now, he will probably have no doubts anymore

    And even if he still has doubts, he's part of the minority, so who cares. It's already been decided in a democratic way that Fed is the GOAT (so far). You'll always have people voting for the other contender(s). And maybe it's time for new elections some day, but right now Fed is the GOAT.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2013
    #75
  26. Luminaire

    Luminaire Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    391
    The TDK campaign continues.
     
    #76
  27. tennisaddict

    tennisaddict G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Messages:
    15,046
    If Nadal fails to make 17 and also other needed records like WTF, weeks at number 1, more majors at hard/wimbledon , Nadal fans may still not accept.

    They are capable of saying we have to wait for Nadal's progenies to be done.
     
    #77
  28. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    What has being the greatest have anything to do with beating Nadal? Or any one particular player? Sampras, Laver, Borg, they didn't beat Nadal. So what?

    He did beat Nadal 10 times. He bageled him on all surfaces.
    Who says that being goat you have to have winning h2h against Nadal on clay?

    So Fed has the most important records and he beat all his rivals in slam finals, to prove, he can beat them on the biggest stages. And you are saying that's all Fed has?

    That's all that is needed.
     
    #78
  29. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Truth,

    With all due respect I've been through this ad nauseum.

    People accuse me of repeating myself. It's really frustrating to have to say the same things over and over and over again.

    I'll do it again.... But please try and read the thread in the future.

    Anyway here goes......

    First of all I believe the difference now is actually 4 years......

    But it doesn't matter ....this is nothing out of the ordinary.....

    Im doing this off the top of my head....Borg Mcenroe I believe was 3 years? Connors Lendl was 8 years ? Borg Lendl was it think 5 or so years and Lendl had a graphite racquet.

    The age difference is nothing extraordinary.....it's always existed with most rivalrys.

    So it's not the agre difference that explains such a wide discrepancy in the head to head because the age difference has existed many times before and yet this is the first time in history that the #2 dominates the #1 by such a wide margin.

    Ranger the clear and logical explanation is that Feds competition was simply sub par.
     
    #79
  30. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    You cannot treat all matches equally because not all matches are equal.

    In the end the slams are all the matters. fed has only been able to win on grass when Nadal was a youngster.

    The score in the slams is 8-2 and almost half of Rafas win came on surfaces other than clay. 3 of those 8 were not on clay.

    And why do you take clay out.....why not take grass out? If you take grass out the slam h2h is 7-0 !!!
     
    #80
  31. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Wtf means nothing although you would like it to.....it's not even a best of five. Why does this matter so much to you? It doesn't matter to anyone else. No one is impressed by it when compared to a grand slam. You can win a million WTFS a million number 1 rankings......but without a slam your nothing.

    All that matters is the slams.....and yes a roger may have the greatest record but he is not the best because he is so utterly dominated in the slams.

    So greatest may mean greatest record but it does not mean the best because Nadal dominates Federer so Nadal is clearly better than Federer.

    If being the greatest means being owned by someone else then who the hell wants to be the greatest?
     
    #81
  32. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Which means his first impressions had to be the truth.

    Other factors may have come into play later.....like money and exhibitions and friendships.

    But you just can't ignore what Sampras true feelings were.....they don't just disappear....he said that Fed has to beat Rafa to be considered the greatest,,,,.quite a few times.

    Did that just disappear? Did Sampras lie? I don't think so.......I think he meant it .

    And I agree with him .
     
    #82
  33. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    No, weeks at nr.1 also matters. It is Nadal who said this.
    And who cares what their h2h record is, since they are 5 years apart.

    And where does it say that Fed has to have a winning h2h vs 1 player to be goat? I never saw any rules.

    This is not Fed TW logic. Slams and weeks nr.1 was used even before people knew Federer existed. So you really have nothing.

    The only legitimate reason against Fed being the goat is that you cannot compare accurately results across eras. That's it. That doesn't mean, Fed is not the goat, but it means that we don't know 100%.

    Better watch out for Djokovic. Where 75% of tennis is played on non clay, Nole is 12-6 against Nadal. He is also 3-1 in slam finals. He also has 2 wtf titles and is nr.1 for the last 2 years.

    So if this continues Djokovic can be nr.2 in this era, since he is better than Nadal where 75% of tennis is being played and he has more chances to win.
    And Nadal may end up being even nr.3 in his own era. Djokovic might soon surpass his weeks at nr.1.

    Better pray, it doesn't happen.
     
    #83
  34. Raz11

    Raz11 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    702
    We get it, you want all Fed fans to admit that they are wrong and Federer is overrated and nothing compared to Nadal. You don't need to waste your time digging up all these old quotes just to back up your agenda. In the end everyone has their own opinion and honestly there is no strong evidence to suggest that your opinion is any more valid than anyone else's.
     
    #84
  35. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    LOL it doesn't matter to you because Nadal never won it. It matters to everyone else who's not guilty of fanboyism.

    WTF is against the top 8 of the world, and the winner can gain 1500 ATP points, which is a lot more than a masters 1000 tournament. Enough said.
     
    #85
  36. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    I know some people don't like some players. But downgrading WTF is cheap.
    All greats cherish WTF. To dismiss it like that is slapping all the greats in the face.
     
    #86
  37. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    yes but you also have to realise that in this case a 13 year old child is downgrading the WTF because his idol never won it.
    And then it's kind of funny.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
    #87
  38. nippurr

    nippurr New User

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    66
    Did Im miss any ifs?
     
    #88
  39. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Fed haters use the most ifs. They have to. How else can they devalue his numbers?
     
    #89
  40. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    True, only this particular poster wasn't a Fed hater.
     
    #90
  41. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    I'm replying to the arguments, never accusing any specific people of being haters.
     
    #91
  42. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,354
    Sampras, Nadal and Laver/Rosewall fans all use the IF factor to devalue Federer's achievement.
     
    #92
  43. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    I'm not surprised. Some people are sick of Fed. They are desperate for a change. Anything, even if crazy.

    Let's say you were locked up for 10 years in a room. And you have only one movie to watch. This movie is the best. But after 10 years it gets boring, so you would give anything to watch something else. Even if it's a bad movie. Just for a change.

    So I can understand the haters frustration. They just want something new.
     
    #93
  44. Tennis Fanatic 070

    Tennis Fanatic 070 Banned

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,165
    Agreed. Some of them are just idiots though.
     
    #94
  45. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,104
    First of all, the turkey stuff is just fun and games. Tell me if nadal for example was behind novak by 10 in h2h that there wouldn't be any Nadal = turkey posts. LOL, there were even posts saying Nadal is Novak 2.0 pigeon haha.

    BTW I'm not scoffing at Fed's 03 Wimbledon. Just saying RG13 draw for Rafa was a lot tougher because of the obstacle he had to overcome to win it.

    It is a mix of both. People like abmk will be the first to tell you that Fed is superior on slow HC and back that argument up with Fed's 4 AO titles. Federer also has 4 IW titles and has won Miami which Nadal never has. So if we go by success, you'd have to say Federer is favoured more by slow HC than Rafa. Unless of course, the number of titles don't tell the whole story...


    Yeah Nadal's 2010 RG draw wasn't tough, I've said that before. But to be fair he did have to beat the only guy who has ever beaten him at RG in the final so it wasn't THAT easy.

    The only other easy draws for Rafa were WIM2010 and even there he still had to beat Sod, Murray and Berdych in a row. Now Birdman wasn't as good in the final as he was in the previous rounds but Murray played decent and so did Soderling.

    USO was easy until the final. Rafa faced his toughest possible opponent imo. In his form he would've beat Fed in straights.

    Yeah, he probably would've. But I doubt he would've beaten Rafa in both of them.


    Correct, but as I said previously, he has 5 years on Rafa and at age 27 Fed had 0 RG titles...

    Rafa doesn't need to match him though. I said before if he can get a couple more WIM titles and AO or US title, he'd surely win a couple more RG as well and get to 17.

    Normally, I would agree, but let's take a look a little deeper:

    Hewitt, coming off his poorest season in years and slipped down from #1 to #17. Nalbandian was playing well. Ferrero coming off a defeat to Chris Gucionne in Sydney, had one of the easiest draws in the history of mankind to even get to that semi and Safin was coming off epic matches against Roddick and Agassi was clearly gassed out by the final. So not as strong as it looks on paper.

    It wasn't just a top 10 player though now was it? It was Roger Federer at a major. Something both Agassi and Hewitt never did (unless Agassi got Fed really early on in one of them). Plus that coming off a 5 setter is misleading. It was a relatively short 5 setter given how easy Novak took a couple of sets and to top it off Novak had a day rest anyway because of the rain delay.

    Now yes, Roger at 2010 USO wasn't crash hot and Agassi of 04 form probably would've beat him as well, but I doubt 04 Agassi form was good enough to beat Rafa 2010 form. That's just my opinion though. Hewitt, I'm sorry, I don't really rate him as a tough opponent for the likes of Rafa or Roger, not enough fire power to really threaten them.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
    #95
  46. Egoista

    Egoista Professional

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,285
    TDK

    Pointless comparing mcen borg etc

    conditions and times are different....game is way more physical now so the age gap tends to show up quite clearly....

    the game today is based on fine margins.........

    with the foundation of physicality and slow courts...heck even the grass of wimbledon is slower than the US open over the last 5 years......

    fed would have crossed 20 gs if conditions on most courts were the same speed as in sampras time.......

    and I repeat until all players are subjected to biological passport testing I m sorry but I have an asterisk on a few......

    dont hate on fed it gets old after a while.......nadal was lucky to win this French open what with djocko hitting the net 4-2 up and nadal pointing like a madmen at this misdemeanor as if ww3 had just taken place...didnt portray his "sportsmanship" in a good light.......
     
    #96
  47. mike danny

    mike danny Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,222
    not enough fire power but he can hit hard when he wants. he troubled federer in 2005 at tge uso. he must have done something different than in the previous year
     
    #97
  48. Virginia

    Virginia Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,537
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Can't be bothered reading through all this drivel. Bottom line: most major titles, plus most weeks at no 1 beats anything else (head to head included). You can't argue against facts.
     
    #98
  49. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    This is brilliant. I'm going to use this instead of debating. Simple and true.
    Anything else is just noise.
     
    #99
  50. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,341
    Well then with that logic Nadal is greater than Laver .
     

Share This Page