Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by bolo, Mar 9, 2010.
Tell that to Roger Federer's backhand and he won't call them half lobs.
More like back-breakers.
Nadal is a poor match-up for Fed. Point, you.
Ahaha moonballing FTW!
I could have sworn you were a Nadal fan? You don't ALWAYS have to be an ass.
Some of you may not speak Fedfanese.
From Websters FedFanese Dictionary:
Nadal is a poor matchup for Federer
Nadal is better than Federer
Just pointing out the facts. Since nadal's life is the one that lead to these facts, I suppose you think he is an "ass". Nice. real nice.
Whatever you say. I just wish you would say something when you have something useful to contribute. 80% of your post count is juvenile nonsense.
Drakulie will be ok once his hormones settle down, he's just a little excited after watching the shakira video. Who does nadal think he is starring in a video with shakira.......! How Dare he.......
This is nonsense. Look at career earnings, look at ranking trends, look at the records federer has broken-- all indicate that Federer is the superior player. The only argument I've heard for Nadal is the head-to-head between the two.
Nadal leads their overall head-to-head series 13-7 (Nadal leads 9-2 on clay, Federer leads 2-1 on grass, they are tied (3-3) on hard courts).
If anything it just indicates that Nadal hasn't been consistent enough to meet Federer anywhere but in finals of clay tournaments, therefore the lopsided h2h.
I think it's 13-7 in grand slams on all surfaces eberything else is bs. But I forgot....I'm speaking English rather than Fedfanese so you can't understand me.
Luckily I speak Federese...... :
simple : Nadal was #1 , Federer #2......oh crap that's plain English again ....and not Fedfanese
I think Drak has always been very clever in pointing out what an utter sham the whole on/off Nadal injury soap opera has been. I challenge you to refute anything he's posted. Of course, you're just upset that he isn't posting "juvenile nonsense" that kisses your idol's ass. Like this:
Simon - yes, Murray - sometimes. But I remember at least 2 matches where no pushing was involved: USO-2008 semifinal and AO-2010 semifinal. Murray played very aggressive and very intelligent tennis. Such a pity that both times in the finals his game changed drastically and became sheer pushing.
Here I'll try simple math to see if you can get it:
16>6 & 5>1
Now if Rafito is a better player as you claim he should have no trouble exceeding or atleast matching those numbers,when he does be sure to notify me,thanks.
Murray can't out-attack Federer, and he can't out-defend Nadal. That's why he plays offense against Nadal (who struggles to hit winners past Murray) and defends against Federer (who can sometimes make many UEs).
Every player should play the DC. It's the only moment in the year where a player has to think "Us" and not "Me", the only moment where he has to take a non selfish decision. Giving one's country a chance to win the DC when one is healthy enough to play is a moral obligation for a player who respects his country. Look at what Nalbandian did recently and you will understand what the DC means for some players.
You have omitted a very important inequation from your conjecture:
28>23 ... in a year of two it will transform to 25>0.
Rafito is young enough to outlast and outplay Rogelito, and comparisons should be done when Rafa is 28 rather than inthe middle of his career.
Murray Mound, you are my hero! :twisted:
Generally speaking, I cannot understand the almost fervent need for some Fed fans to put down anything and everything Nadal. It beggars belief.
I think what is most telling is what Federer himself thinks. The Hit for Haiti game was very revealing, Roger was full of praise for Rafa and his game, constantly pointing out how Rafa gets volleys he shouldn't, how he troubles him with this serves, how his lobs almost 'always go in'. I could go on. He definitely considers Rafa a more than worthy adversary so why can't some of his "fans"?
Surely there is no shame in acknowledging that Rafa on his best days can get the better of Federer. Or is there?
Well said. Trotting out the numbers is easy enough, putting it into context is another thing entirely.
Good to know Nadal is fully fit now. It's a shame Murray and he can't play in the semi-finals. Usually Nadal tends to get *injured* while los.... oops, I mean playing Murray.
H2H: 7 - 3
Who is the loser?
Murray leads the recent head to head 3 - 2. Murray has beaten him at the last two slams where they played each other (i.e. the big ones that matter).
Set-score of the last two slam encounters: 6-1 Murray.
No I don't, and never said that. I think Nadal is the second best player of this era, and since Federer is the best that must be good for Roger's chances of the no.1 ranking as well as his chances to win Slams. Doesn't mean he'll win them all with Rafa overplaying. I actually still favour Rafa at RG.
Tennis is a me-sport, get over it.
We can incorporate a me-part if you like, but do it in two weeks or something and not all around the year with more travelling etc. Nobody takes DC too seriously, and it has far from the respect you get from winning a Slam. It's probably below an MS event.
Most players could play and I'd like Federer to play more, but injury-prone guys who complain about the length of the season should SKIP IT.
ONTOPIC: Great pictures, it's good he's back. Just hope he stops being stubborn and plays 12 tourneys a year.
Nadal was quite lucky to win that one set, the break helped him a lot to come back strong. Murray was thrashing him that day as well.
How's that funny?
Nadal had one of the best records against top10 players a few years ago, now he has lost like 10 matches in a row against them. I don't think it's currently relevent that Nadal beat Murray in 2007.
But it goes both ways, the fact that Murray won the last two slam encounters doesn't mean that Nadal won't ever beat him again in a slam.
It's true. Nadal hasn't beaten anyone ranked in the top 10 for ages now.
Who decides what's recent and what's not? 2008 is recent but 2007 isn't, right?
The head to head says 7-3 and that's it.
He beat Tsonga in Paris.
And despite this fact, Murray is still behind him in the rankings.
Not really,I merely pointed out that since Nadal is better than Fed(according to Murray Mound)he should have no trouble at all matching Fed's numbers in the future and that he notifies me when he does.Until he's at least close to Fed's numbers it's a bit silly saying he's better.
I wasn't the one who made the original comparison,Murray Mound did.
Slam score is 6:0 Nadal, masters score 15:4 Nadal, career titles score 36:14 Nadal, age difference is less than a year.
Who is the loser?
Murray is not a loser.
How does the head-to-head help Nadal when he plays Murray?
From what I've seen Murray has learned a lot from his past defeats to Nadal.
On hardcourt he has found the perfect balance between defending and attacking. He can enter hardcourt encounters against Nadal with a lot of confidence, knowing that Nadal needs to play very well to beat him, and even then it might not be enough.
Obviously on clay and grass Nadal's still clear favorite.
Everyone except Nadal is a loser, Nadal is the greatest (despite having beat only losers).
A top four player is now a loser.
I can post stats of Federer and make Nadal look like a loser.
And I hope that Nadal will learn from his defeats too.
I don't know what are we arguing about.
The fact that Murray beat Nadal in the last meetings doesn't mean that Murray is a better player, just like Nadal having a positive head to head with Federer doesn't make him a better player.
Are you saying that Federer is a loser?
Never said that Murray is the better overall player. Nadal's clearly superior on clay and grass, but I think Murray has the edge on hardcourt.
It doesn't mean though that Nadal can't beat Murray on hardcourt or that Murray can beat Nadal on clay/grass (as unlikely as that might seem).
I wasn't serious. Murray obviously isn't a loser, nor are the other top-players.
He also beat Soderling in Aby-Dabi.
Who-is-the-loser part was dedicated to this statement: "It's a shame Murray and he can't play in the semi-finals. Usually Nadal tends to get *injured* while los.... oops, I mean playing Murray".
1. Nadal usually loses to Murray
2. Two times mean usually.
If Nadal doesn't win this tournament, it will be because he is injured, or not 100% form.
Abu-Dhabi is an exho so that win counts as much (nothing) as Tomic's over Djokovic in Kooyong.
Thanks, endmondsm. Unfortunately, Nadal butt kissers don't like to hear this stuff.
Neither was I . All these my players better than your player conversations do become a bit tiresome.
Yes. And what's the problem? Are you mad that he doesn't give credit to his opponents? Many players (including Federer) aren't doing it.
Actually that's not really what it is about.
I'm not a fan of Murray, but I can't stand they way some Nadal fans disrespect him.
Separate names with a comma.