How lucky are we....

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by wy2sl0, Sep 29, 2012.

?

Nadal + Federer = Highest level of tennis

  1. These two are God's gift to tennis fans

    51 vote(s)
    70.8%
  2. What? Cvac + Nadal 40 shot rallies!

    6 vote(s)
    8.3%
  3. No, the early to late 90's was THE best

    8 vote(s)
    11.1%
  4. Mac, Borg, Connors, what else could you want?

    7 vote(s)
    9.7%
  1. wy2sl0

    wy2sl0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,571
    Fed at 30, Nadal with broken knees 10 years into his career.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSmDCHLJM70
    The level of play is just insane; and that was just a "good" match between the two. I could and have watched replays of Fed Nad matches over and over.

    We are always talking about who is best, better - too many opinions. This is IMO the best period to watch tennis, and possibly may be for a LONG time to come. Agree or disagree?
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
    #1
  2. svijk

    svijk Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Messages:
    667
    agree, without doubt...never been a rivalry between 2 potential GOATs at any point in the history of tennis
     
    #2
  3. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    Agassi-Sampras??
    Borg-Connors?
     
    #3
  4. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,130
    Yeah, another amazing match of shots many players probably dream of, just like the first four sets of the 2009 AO final. Both heartbreaking losses to me, but objectively after letting them sink in they were sick matches.
     
    #4
  5. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,542
    What rivalry? Nadal has school Fed more times then not for his entire career.. Thats not a rivalry.. Thats a one sided beatdown almost especially at slams.. What is at like 8-2 h2h in the slams in favor of Rafa? ROFL

    Rafa has taken Fed to the woodshed on all surfaces on the big stages when its mattered most.. The only place Fed has had any clear advantage was indoors at the end of the year.

    Fed's lucky he hasn't ran into Rafa more at wimbledon post 2008 either or else Nadal would own that h2h on grass as well.

    Hell the only matches at the slams Fed managed to win was when Nadal was a young greenhorn.. He hasn't been able to beat Rafa at a slam in FIVE years
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
    #5
  6. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    They will tell you that he beats him only on clay or that clay matches do not count. Even if Nadal leads 3-2 outside clay in slams.
     
    #6
  7. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,899
    1:55

    Chris Fowler is a tad excited
     
    #7
  8. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I agree Federer vs Nadal is no rivalry. Federer is Nadal's slave. Even on outdoor hard courts Nadal owns Federer and always has, and on grass Federer would be trailing now if he had met Nadal anymore on grass since 2008. That said the fact Federer does manage to lead significantly in overall achievements, and achievements in each surface outside of clay despite not even challenging Nadal seriously in head to head play, so that does show he is the better player overall. His dominance vs the field is so much greater than Nadal's (minus clay) to overcome Nadal's vast overall head to head superiority. Nadal on hard court especialy is too easily beaten by too many people, and I wont even get started on indoors.
     
    #8
  9. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Based on what SetSampras?
     
    #9
  10. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,680
    Location:
    In The City
    Lol. A new user asserting that someone else is a former banned user.


    It is as ironic as NSK claiming to despise people who make multiple accounts to troll. :lol:
     
    #10
  11. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Who would have won had they played at Wimbledon in 2010, 2011, and even 2009 had Nadal played and both reached the final. The answer is not Federer.
     
    #11
  12. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,421
    Look, this thread was made by the OP to appreciate the great players these two are, and how much they enrich this era. It wasn't to open up a can of worms or hijack the thread and insert your blatant insecurity.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
    #12
  13. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,130
    Those theoretical results are a moot point, because Nadal has missed many more potential slam meetings with Federer on his best surfaces than vice versa and match ups are always contingent on both players playing well enough to reach a late round in the tournament. Federer has played well much more often, but is criticized for this ironically. Also ironic is how a seven-time champ is considered "lucky" for not having to face a two-time champ he has defeated multiple times and also won the tournament other times when prime Nadal was present but did not make the final.

    Furthermore, the rivalry between the two transcends their H2H since they are the two faces of the game, going at it since 2005 in terms of ranking points and accomplishments. Clearly that aspect has a huge part in it publicly speaking since they have such contrasting styles but have both had great success at the top of the game. If you don't see that aspect of it you are pretty myopic.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2012
    #13
  14. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Proof? Nadal had to play out of his skin to beat a Federer who was having his first slump year (2008) in Wimbledon. For a guy who had to play his best to beat Federer only once (in 5 sets to boot) , you sure are confident about his chances. :lol:

    He would've spanked him in 2010, that's it. I'm not even sure if Nadal would've beaten Roddick in 09. And in 2011, considering that Federer played him tough in RG, he would've had a decent chance of winning. I doubt that Nadal can serve like Tsonga didn against Fed. And 08 Nadal >> 11 Nadal on grass.
     
    #14
  15. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    I used to post on MTF. He said something there about Berdych and said the same thing here verbatim. He also posts the same way he always does. About Murray tapping shots in and his incredible Sampras worship.

    It is him.
     
    #15
  16. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    Top 10 greatest rivalries of all time:

    1. Federer v. Nadal
    2. Martina v. Chris
    3. Sampras v. Agassi
    4. McEnroe v. Connors
    5. Borg v. McEnroe
    6. Venus v. Serena
    7. Laver v. Rosewall
    8. Graf v. Seles
    9. Riggs v. King
    10. Budge v. Von Cramm
     
    #16
  17. Tennisguy3000

    Tennisguy3000 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    471
    I was lucky enough to see Federer play at the US Open (last year) and Nadal & Murray play in Japan as well... Fed was truly art in motion, it was stunning to see him play live. It was nice to cross that off of my bucket list. I hope Nadal can recover to keep it interesting.

    I should add I also liked watching 3. Sampras v. Agassi as well, I remember Agassi's retirement (and Pete's) like it was yesterday.
    Edit: Cant not mention 5. Borg v. McEnroe as well ;-)
     
    #17
  18. The Bawss

    The Bawss Banned

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,829
    Location:
    Lyon, France.
    Fed just lit up the highlight reels. Watching it live left me with the impression he played a pretty bad match, leading with a break in most (all?) sets, making dumb unforced errors. Grrr should never have lost to Nadal! Not in 2009 nor in 2012!
     
    #18
  19. wy2sl0

    wy2sl0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,571
    I agree with you and don't want to start a heated debate, but it is pretty obvious that Federer's problem isn't his talent ability to beat Nadal but rather a mental issue.

    Regardless Roger usually comes out of the gates believing he can win - and Nadal truely brings out his best. Federer has not played better than playing against Nadal and vice versa.
     
    #19
  20. Apun94

    Apun94 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    757
    PERFECT! Cudnt have said it better than myself
     
    #20
  21. wy2sl0

    wy2sl0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,571
    We all know Nadal is bar none the best clay court player of all time. He is proven to be THAT good because he dominates Fed on clay, whom of which is arugably the second best CC'er of all time. The head to head is not as bad as it seems.

    Clay courts: Nadal, 12–2
    Hard courts: Federer, 6–5
    Indoor: Federer, 4–0
    Outdoor: Nadal, 5–2
    Grass courts: Federer, 2–1

    It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that the clay domination (because Federer made all finals for a long time it seemed) has destroyed his H2H. Nadal for years didn't even make it to any hard court finals. Do we really need to keep bringing this up...it is quite sad to see how people can continue to make posts like this.
     
    #21
  22. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    Nadal > Fed on clay(not blue clay)
    Fed > Nadal on grass, hc and indoor.

    Anyway, this thread isn't about h2h, but about how lucky we're to have both Fed/Nadal on the tour, which put the WTA into shame.
     
    #22
  23. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
    #23
  24. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,937
    The answer is you don't know that, none of us do. Federer is the superior grass player and even though Nadal beat him at W the last time they played there in 2008, Federer still leads 2-1 at W. Their matches there have always been close. The only problem now is that Federer is much older and you don't know how he is going to play from one match to the next. He seems to have a problem being consistent at slams now that he is older. That fact would be my only worry in Federer playing Nadal at W at this point in their careers. If Federer can manage to be "on" if they were to meet in a W final, it could easily go either way.
     
    #24
  25. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    So, some of Federer matches count twice:?.

    If you count Hard courts overall you can't mention indoor matches again. It's like saying. Clay in Montecarlo, Nadal wins, clay in RG, Nadal wins, clay in Rome, Nadal wins, etc....If you leave Indoor outisde, Nadal leads in Hard courts....

    Why can't *******s accept Nadal leads the H2H fair and square?? Federer is better in a lot of other aspects, but Nadal owns the H2H. As simple as that.

    And he dominates in his best surface by a much bigger margin than Federer's in his (12-2 against 2-1).
     
    #25
  26. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    But we do, only to certain surface/court/condition.

    Nadal leads h2h on clay(not blue clay).

    Fed leads h2h on grass, hc, and indoor.
     
    #26
  27. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest


    Bingo. (10 char).
     
    #27
  28. The Bawss

    The Bawss Banned

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,829
    Location:
    Lyon, France.
    Bingo. (10 char).
     
    #28
  29. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    No other fan group would be so delusional to deny someone leading their favorite player 8-2 in slams owns them as far as H2H goes. Not even the Sharapova fan group on the WTA forum who are basically a bunch of nuts are that extreme. That is what makes ****s truly special and one of a kind.

    Anyway as Federer is too much Nadal's lapdog for it to be one of the very best rivalries the best rivalries of all time would have to be:

    1. Evert vs Navratilova- no contest, and a huge ROTFL at TMF rating Federer-Nadal above this.
    2. Sampras vs Agassi
    3. Graf vs Seles- the stabbing took away yet actually adds to the rivalry as it ensures people will be talking about it forever.
    4. Laver vs Rosewall
    5. Serena vs Henin
    6. Connors vs Borg
    7. Mcenroe vs Borg
    8. Court vs King
    9. Serena vs Venus
    10. Davenport vs Hingis

    Honorable mentions which dont quite make the top 10 are Djokovic vs Nadal, Becker vs Edberg, Lendl vs Becker, Evert vs Goolagong,
    Hingis vs Venus.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2012
    #29
  30. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Federer being Nadal's lapdog is a by prodcut of him playing him on clay. Federer is leading the H2H outside of it.

    With Serena and Sharapova, surface doesn't matter one bit.
     
    #30
  31. wy2sl0

    wy2sl0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,571
    This. Ask Nadal who he would rather face on grass or indoor hardcourt.

    Answer = anyone but Federer.

    I am not a *******, nor do I have problems admitting anything. Nadal is a tremendous player, quite possibly he will become the second best player (stats) of all time before he retires - and he has a TERRIFIC record against the great Federer...however it is way closer than 18-10 (which tbh isn't exactly terrible).
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2012
    #31
  32. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    :lol: How about we calm down on that one.
     
    #32
  33. The Bawss

    The Bawss Banned

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,829
    Location:
    Lyon, France.
    Take your pills, bro. I don't think he will end up being considered as good as Sampras let alone Laver.
     
    #33
  34. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Did anyone say that it's a result of cheating?

    There's something we like to call "biased sample". It's like claiming that a vast majority of Americans are black because of a study conducted in Harlem.

    You can't ignore the fact that the majority of their matches happened on the one surface that Nadal owns.

    It is true that Nadal would probably lead the H2H in fairer conditions. (both in their primes, with fairly distributed surfaces) But there's not a snowball's chance in hell that he would lead by such margins.
     
    #34
  35. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    They played 11 times on hard and 14 on clay. It's not a huge difference. If the H2H was 21-19, you could attribute that difference to the surfaces. But it's not the case.

    In slams Nadal leads OUTSIDE clay 3-2. Leaving outside his best surface, he still leads the H2H.

    On Fed's best surface and Nadal worse, Fed barely leads 6-5. On Nadal's best and Fed's worse, Nadal complete distroys him (12-2). On grass Fed leads 2-1. Yes, Fed leads on two surfaces and Nadal only one, but the difference is huge.

    If you do the math, you can clearly see that if they had played the same amount of times in each surface, Nadal would still lead the H2H.
     
    #35
  36. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    ^
    Another words, Nadal is better than Fed on clay but Fed is better than Nadal on hc, grass and indoor.
     
    #36
  37. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Baby Nadal who was a dog on grass at that point even pushed prime Federer at Wimbledon in 2006. The only time Federer beat something approaching prime Nadal in a slam was Wimbledon 2007 (and this of course was prime Federer) and even in that match he lost something like 80% of the baseline rallies, had to have his best serving performance ever, and had to save mountains of break points to eke out a 5 set win. I dont think for one moment Nadal would have been scared to play Federer on grass anytime the last 5 years, let alone anytime in the future. In fact at Wimbledon 2010 and 2011 he would have rather played Federer than some of the people he did play, especialy Djokovic in 2011.

    Yes indoors you are probably right, and only indoors. Then again indoors Nadal is probably worried to play almost anyone in the top 15, his poor H2H with Federer there is mostly how Nadal sucks royally indoors more than anything else, LOL!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2012
    #37
  38. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    Indoor is not a surface. Indoor wins are included in hard. If you consider indoor apart, then Nadal leads in Hard. If not you can say, Nadal leads on clay and outdoors.

    Nadal leads on clay and Federer outisde clay. But Nadal's lead is a lot stronger. If they play the same amount of matches in each surface, Nadal woult still lead the H2H, so Nadal does not lead because they play more matches on clay. Federer can't be as dominant os his best surface as Nadal is in his.

    If you think it's the same to lead 12-2 than 6-5 well.......
     
    #38
  39. The Bawss

    The Bawss Banned

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,829
    Location:
    Lyon, France.
    Maybe we should ask Nadal if indoors is a surface?
     
    #39
  40. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,937
    But the point is outside of clay in slams the 3-2 h2h in favor of Nadal is not enough to determine that Nadal is better than Federer. It is only in the clay slams where Nadal has displayed a definite dominance over Federer. If they had met more let's say on HC in Federer's prime (something which did not happen because Nadal was not good enough), the h2h could have been a lot different. We will never know for sure now. The fact that clay dominates their h2h is a reality however that Nadal fans have to acknowledge. If the h2h was so out of whack and in Nadal's favor after Nadal and Federer had met more times on grass or HC, that would be a different story. Clay is a legitimate surface but it is also Nadal's best surface by a lot and that has to be recognized, you can't just discount it.
     
    #40
  41. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Anyway the correct answer to this poll is the 3rd or 4th option. People debate the 2003-2007 field vs the 2008-2012 but two things are for sure, both are much stronger than the 1998-2002 transition era, and both are much weaker than many past eras in mens tennis, way weaker than 1990-1995, nowhere near the Borg/McEnroe era and so on.

    Both the Federer/Nadal era and the Nadal/Djokovic/Federer era have problems. The Federer era had decent depth in the top 15 but no all time greats besides Federer until Nadal emerged, and Nadal was a mug on non clay surfaces until late 2007/2008, so no worthy opponents for Federer other than Nadal on clay. The Nadal/Djokovic era has a very strong top 4, and a huge hole after that with no depth. So neither is totally bad, but neither is even close to some of the fields past.
     
    #41
  42. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,937
    But you don't know that. You don't know what would have happened if they had met in slams more at Wimbledon and at the HC slams, especially if those matches occurred in Federer's prime. The number of times they have met at those non-clay slams is not enough to really tell us much. What their h2h does tell us 100% is that Nadal is the better clay player.
     
    #42
  43. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    Exactly. I Agree on everything.
     
    #43
  44. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    1. The point isnt Nadal being better than Federer. The point is that Nadal is much better than Federer in the H2H aspect which he is, this is an undisputable and slam dunk fact no matter how much the ****s deny. In the real World even the many commentators and past players who now call Federer the GOAT, always mention when Federer and Nadal play that Nadal owns their H2H, there is nobody outside Planet TW who has even tried to dispute that so sorry those of you who are and making endless excuses about it are in your own little fantasy World. Federer is still better overall as a player at this point, yes you are right on that.

    2. Why cant Federer dominate Nadal on any surface the way Nadal does Federer? Yep exactly. PS- if you say indoors, then if you are seperating indoors that means Nadal dominates Federer on both clay and outdoor hard courts to the extreme (5-2 on outdoor hard courts and 2-0 in slams). If you are down 2-3 in slams on your surfaces, and down 0-5 on the other guys surface, or put another way down 0-5 on your worst surface and the other guys worst, and also down 0-2 on your best surface and the other guys worst where you have 9 slams and the other guy has only 2 and still managed this, that overall is total ownage, there is no way around it.

    3. It is hilarious any match from 2008 onwards is slated as post prime Federer, yet people act as if Nadal was in his prime when he lost those early Wimbledon finals to Federer, especialy 2006, and that Nadal was in his prime in 2005-2007 and should have been reaching hard court slam finals when Federer the so called hard court GOAT wasnt even good enough at that age to reach hard court slam quarterfinals, ROTFL!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2012
    #44
  45. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I still cant believe anyone had the sheer audacity to put Federer vs Nadal above Evert vs Navratilova. There will never be a rivalry, man or women, that matches or surpasses Evert vs Navratilova. The two played 80 times and ended up in a virtual tie. Let alone being challenged by a rivalry where one player wins 65% of the matches and 80% of the slam matches, and the player on the vast short side of that is the more accomplished player as well, LOL!
     
    #45
  46. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    How about just compare Nadal's total clay titles to Fed, and do the same for hc and grass. That should gives you the better picture of how far they distanced each other on each paticular surface. I would say in this order:

    1. Fed >>> Nadal on hc
    2. Nadal >> Fed on clay
    3. Fed > Nadal on grass.

    Fair enough ?
     
    #46
  47. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    The number of times they have met on clay is a testament to how great a clay court player Federer is. On other surfaces Federer has an edge in head to head and a devastating superior record, which amounts to his clearly superior overall record. Hypothesis, excuses and what ifs does not change that. And yes, what great tennis experiences the two has provided us with, in fascinatingly different manners.
     
    #47
  48. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    You may not think Fed/Nadal is a great rivalry, but most fans believe they are one of the greatest of all time. I just did a search and found a random link that listed the top rilvalries of all time in tennis.

    Nadal vs Federer
    Martina vs Chris
    Sampras vs Agassi
    McEnroe vs Borg
    McEnroe vs Connors

    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/five-great-tennis-rivalries-220900340--ten.html
     
    #48
  49. dangalak

    dangalak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Messages:
    608
    Didn't I just admit that? :confused:

    1. How did Nadal "push" Federer in 2006? he got bageled in the first set. Sure, he took a set in a tie break, but that doesn't mean much: if a player serves well or the other one returns poorly, the inferior player still can win a set, like Soderling did against Federer in USO 2009 QF. Did Soderling "push" Federer there? Most would tell you that Federer handled him something fierce.

    Considering how effective Nadal's lefty serve is on grass and how poorly Federer usually returns it, it's not a suprise to me that Nadal managed to steal a set. He still was by FAR second best.

    2. While Federer was not past his prime yet in 2007, he was clearly not peaking either. Do the names Volandri and Canas ring a bell?
    I would also like to see where Nadal was shown to win 80% of the rallies. One more thing you ignore is the fact that Nadal was also serving well.

    Let me offer you a counter-example: in the final of 2008, didn't Nadal at the peak of his powers need a 5 set thriller to beat a Federer who was clearly not himself that year? Federer lost to people he typically never loses to (Roddick, Fish) and truly declined this time. (even more so than 2007) The fact that he managed to push Nadal (this time the term is actually appropriate) at his absolute best proves that a Federer at the peak of his powers would be a favourite over him on Wimby, even more so than Djokovic 2011, who was taking advantage of his mental grip on Nadal in that final more than anything.

    Last but not least, I doubt that Nadal would be crushed by most top 15 people indoors. Remember he beat a Murray that was on fire in London, he isn't weak against everybody.

    Yes you can...:confused: Federer leads on grass, hardcourt and indoors. Nadal leads on clay and outdoors.
     
    #49
  50. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    whether they are one of the greatest of all time or not they come nowhere near Navratilova vs Evert. On what planet can Federer vs Nadal be considered a greater rivalry than Evert vs Navratilova. Come up with even one remotedly valid reason it could be considered a better rivalry. This should be good for a laugh, LOL!

    PS- like anyone is going to base their opinion being right or wrong on the esteemed words of the great Brad Boeker.
     
    #50

Share This Page