Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Sabratha, Nov 27, 2012.
what's the order then?
God, stop quoting Clowny21. Ignore list doesn't hide the quotes...
well just put me on ignore then. Problem solved
When it's all said it and done it will Fed first and Djesus second.
A bit off topic but how in the hell could Del Potro still be out of shape? ROFLMAO
I was referring to Federer and Nadal being the all time greats and Djokovic tagging behind (for now).
that's what I thought and I agree. But of course I would, for now, as you say, its a fact.
Other people are quoting clark anyway. I can't avoid every 6-1 6-3 6-0 posts since he gets quoted quite often.
He's in a perpetual state of out-of-shape and rustiness, some people would probably argue his 09 USO form was him out-of-shape.
DelPo fans just need to suck it up and accept that he's just a guy that got hot for one tourney.
These people say as if Rafa is an old man returning to play Tennis at age 60, lolz. He is the third favorite to win after Djokovic and Murray at AO and the favorite to win RG this year
go nadal go
i dont understand that why nadal lost in wimbledon
i thought the natural ground(grass and clay) dont hurt his knees
Nadal has to slow down some time, he can't keep playing at a high level forever. He has been since he was about 18 years of age. He's 26 now, turning 27 next year. Don't you think he would be declining? Even just a little?
He was simply outplayed by Rosol for that match.
He is declining but that doesn't mean he will go out before QF in AO.
Is rosol playing in AO ? any chance of him that he can enter just askin
He went out in the quarterfinals in 2011.
If he's healthy, he should do better than that. Though of course we will see how rusty he will be.
Lol do you seriously think murraa has got a chance against Nadal if they meet, i dont think so.
He was injured at Indian Wells. Remember when he withdrew from the Miami semis and said his problems started at Indian Wells? It got worse from that time, and he needed a lot of treatment during Roland Garros just to take the court. His problems may not originate on clay/grass, but that doesn't mean clay/grass cure a problem that originated on hardcourt.
No. No infinity.
Fed fans like to believe that Nadal,who according to them,entered his prime in 2005,is still at his peak/prime right now at nearly 27 and almost 8 years later(ridiculous beyond words). In the same breath they will then tell you that Fed's prime ended in 2007, after only being in his prime for 4 years,even though he didn't win his first slam until 2003 and the age of 21,and continued to rack up slams all the way to 2009 and beyond. They just like to believe that Nadal is getting beat up on by mugs of all types while at his peak/prime because it lets them believe that Nadal's wins over Fed were just because of Nadal's "moonball" forehand,and nothing else. It's just a way to demean Nadal's wins against Fed,and knock his abilities.
The ****s yes but to be fair most rational Fed fans on this forum have revised their view of Fed's prime as 03-09 which makes sense. Fed being a late bloomer is having a great post prime run and I would say Nadal being an early bloomer had a great pre-prime run. So if you use the same number of years, Rafa prime = 2007-2013 with him having a good pre-prime run in 05/06 and most likely having a decent 2014 and a strong decline in 2015.
He lost to Murray and Ferrer at AO 10 and 11 respectively. Both those guys had beaten Nadal before at the USO and give him problems on hardcourts.
With his game it is very possible that he'll knock the rust off rather quickly. He can play with a lot of margin on his shots and still be very effective so it's not like he's going to have to be 100% dialed in to win like a pure shotmaker would.
We've seen before players come back from long injury layoffs and you think "wow this guy is gonna be super rusty", but actually the time away sometimes refreshes and rejuvenates them.
Then again 5 months without hitting a ball and his knees aren't getting any younger. You wouldn't be crazy to think that his prime is past him now. We'll just have to see.
Have you seen how difficult many of those matches have been for Nadal? Watch their Monte Carlo 2011 and World Tour Finals 2010 matches. Also watch their Japan Final 2011 match. Murray is a major hurdle for Nadal. Anything less than Nadal's best won't get it done.
And you still can't name to date one Fed fan who said that (let alone says it often).
But hey since we're generalizing, Nadal fans like to believe he was a baby before 2008 on all surfaces, baby on HC in 2008, injured in 2009, unstoppable juggernaut of destruction in 2nd half of 2010 and and old man in massive decline in 2011 and beyond.
4 whole years sure as hell beats middle of 2008, 2-3 months in 2009 and 2nd half of 2010.
BTW. Nadal continued to rack up slams after 2010 as well, not to mention that he also made his personal best 5 slam finals in a row between 2011 FO and 2012 FO.
Oh for Pete's sake, enough of this nonsense.
Nadal always had more "bad" losses per year compared to Fed (which is not a knock on him, Fed is just outrageously consistent), hardly an indication of whether he's in his peak, prime, massive decline etc.
-In 2008 he got blasted at AO by Tsonga, lost in routine fashion to Novak in IW (compare that match to their battles in 2011 IW+Miami for example) and weak era clown Davydenko in Miami and even during CC season suffered a shock loss to washed up JCF.
-In 2009 he got a string of one sided losses after USO, lost to Soderling at FO, had his worst slam final loss (gamewise) to date against Delpo at USO (6-2 6-2 6-2), he even went 0-3 in RR in WTF IIRC.
-In 2010 he lost to geriatric Ljubo at IW, past prime weak era clown Roddick in Miami, weak era clown Bagdathis in Cincy, nobody like Guillermo Garcia Lopez (in Bangkok I think), struggled to get past journeymen in early rounds at Wimbledon etc.
So do tell me then, when did this mythical Nadal's prime/peak happen exactly?
If anything he was far more overall consistent in 2011, for the most of the season he only lost to Novak who played out of his skin.
Bla bla bla...
And Nadal fans believe Fed only achieved more than Nadal (so far anyway) due to weak era (during which Nadal was a baby of course) and a massive amount of luck.
Actually most of the revising came from Nadal fans who back in the day maintained Fed's level didn't drop in 2008, it was all due to Rafa's amazing improvement as a player, the field wasn't "weak" anymore, Fed's luck ran out etc.
Come 2011 and Nadal performs against the field heck of a lot better than Fed did in 2008 (especially taking into account their respective standard of domination over a given year) and suddenly he's in massive decline of course.
Congratulations, you're the 2nd Nadal fan in this forum I've ever seen give (or even make an attempt) a somewhat clear period of prime tennis for Nadal (the other one is NadalAgassi).
Name them. Afterall,you have no proof anyone actually said that unless you can give names/dates/year,etc...
And Monfed,Magnus,Ray Mercer,etc have all said Fed's prime ended in 2007. There are many others that have said it as well.
No he didn't. Nadal has only won 2 out of the last 8 slams. How is that racking up slams? Fed,otoh, has won 5 slams and made number of finals since his followers said he was in serious decline.
The rest of your post is just the ranting and raving of pure nonsense.
Prove it with names. You have yet to come up with any proof of what you're saying.
You have said that yourself, or something along those lines.
And you, Mustard, Jackson Vile, Nameless One, DRII etc. all said Nadal's prime ended in 2011 and once again 4 years is a much longer period than parts of 2008, 2009 and 2010 who combined don't constitute for a year.
However that's beside the point as I didn't say there aren't many Fed fans who claim his prime was 2004-2007 (there are, more than the ones you numbered), my beef is with you claiming those same Fed fans who claim Fed's prime was 2004-2007 also claim Nadal was in his prime since 2005 (who the heck even claims that?).
For the sake of argument I'll use 2008-2010 time frame as Nadal's prime, he won 6 slams during that period and dropped to winning 2 in 2 years (and if he wins FO this year that will be 3 slams compared to 6).
Fed during 2004-2007 won 11 slams and dropped to winning 5 slams during 2008-2012 period, tell me how is Nadal's drop-off so much more substantial?
Yes, stating facts-ranting and nonsense.
I'm still waiting for you to come up with a year in which Nadal didn't suffer a number of "bad" losses.
Yes, because asking you to come up with names of posters who said that more than 4 years ago is the same as asking you to come up with a legion of Fed fans all supposedly claiming Nadal was in his prime since 2005 all the time right now.
If Zagor wants names and proof from me about some posts I have read on a tennis message board like this is a court of law,then he should do the same.
And I never said what you're accusing me of saying.
I think being in your prime does not necessarily mean you play your best all the time. Only on this forum do we expect these continuous smooth prime- peak curves when the reality is that players are often hot and cold within the same year. Novak is a great example. He was certainly in his prime in 2010 yet 2008 was probably a better year for him.
Did Fed play as well in 08 as he did in 07? Probably not. But being a little off in your form for whatever reason (missing practice, bad days, Nadal being in his head) does not necessarily constitute a decline. Just like its quite plausible that Nadal in 2011 played at his highest level against everyone else but did not necessarily play at his highest level vs Nole.But that does not mean he wasn't in his prime in 2011 , he was quite possibly still in the last year of his peak (if 2010 USO was Nadal peak then I cant see how someone can rapidly decline by 2011)
Ultimately, we all have the benefit of hindsight and we if we apply the same rules to each player, we can come up with an answer that although might not be accurate, at least people can agree it is fair. So a 7 yr prime for Fed, 03-09 with peak 04-07 and a 7 yr prime for Rafa 07-13 with peak 08-11 seems like a fair compromise
Wth are you talking about? Making some sense would help.
Are you kidding me? Magnus,Monfed,and several others have all said Nadal's prime started in 2005. There are others as well.
So? You expect me to recall every single person's name on here who said Nadal's prime started in 2005,so you should be able to recall those who say Fed's prime ended in 2007. Maybe you shouldn't ask unreasonable questions if you can't answer similar questions yourself.
Yeah, lots of people have said Nadal was on his prime in 2005, and not only ****s from what I remember.
Anyway, good posts here about Fed and Rafa's primes. Namelessone has made good points about Rafa's prime before.
cc0509 and TMF do and repeatedly insist upon it, though I suppose they wouldnt fall under the category of sane Federer fans (if such a thing even exists on Planet TW).
There are a couple
Yes but that's why you use the general/overall level of play for a given year/period and also take into consideration different standards of domination for different players.
For example, saying that Nadal was old and washed up (or whatever else Clarky said) in 2011 because he had a few unexpected losses/upsets on HC is almost akin to me saying Fed was washed up in 2007 because he lost to Nadal at the FO or something, it's a norm for him and so are a few "bad" HC losses per year for Nadal (or struggling in early Wimbledon rounds for that matter).
Novak is a different kind than Fed or Nadal who are sort of a tunnel visioned fanatics (and I don't mean that in a bad way, they're dominators), I'd say his 2007 even was better than his 2009 and 2010.
I agree in principle though as far as I'm concerned argument for Fed dropping level in 2008 were not related to his losses against Nadal (or Novak at AO for that matter) but rather a string of (sometimes one-sided) losses to people he had excellent records prior to that point, his failure to even reach a single final on HC prior to USO that year and similar but I don't care to go into that argument again.
I'd even settle for 08-11 prime and 08-10 peak for Nadal as long I don't get a mish mash of parts of several different years.
You mean the ones about how Nadal was in massive decline in 2011 (while of course Fed was amazing in 2008)?
I could believe TMF would say something like that but cc0509 I remember saying Nadal's prime to be 2008-2011 or something similar.
It was not only on hc. Nadal struggled badly on his best surface last year. He was taken to 3 by 30 year old 135th ranked Paulo Lorenzi in Rome. He struggled with Isner at RG. He struggled with Andujar at RG. He had trouble with old man Ljubicic at RG. He lost footspeed and his backhand suffered dramatically because of it. His serve ended up in the gutter as did his mental strength. You continually saying that Nadal was playing peak tennis last year is preposterous.
Oh,and you got your answer to just who has said Fed's prime ended in 2007.
Asking me to remember people who said Fed didn't decline in 2008 back in the day (meaning in 2008) is not the same as me asking you to name some of your supposed "All the Fed fans who claim such and such all the time".
Get the difference? One thing happened 4 years ago, the other is (according to you) happening constantly in present time.
And the entirety of Fed's fanbase consists of Magnus and Monfed?
No, I expect you to not constantly make sweeping generalizations with a lot of hyperbole attached to it.
Just who said that?
And cc does think Fed's prime ended in 2007,but that's her opinion and she can think what she wants.
Nearly 2 years ago is present time?
You assume that the entire Nadal fanbase is made up of a couple of people. People you can't even name. Lol.
Funny because you are doing the same thing yourself.
Nadal's prime is different per surface:
Clay: 2005-2010 I guess is reasonable, or 2006-2010 as he was much more beatable in 2005 but nobody could capatilize.
Outdoor hard courts: mid 2008-still ongoing
Grass: 2007-2010 I would say.
Indoors: not really sure, basically whenever he isnt completely beat up by the end of the year and can play some the decent level of indoor tennis (2005 until season ending before WTF, 2006, 2010) he can sometimes muster.
You said losing to "mugs", the only surface on which Nadal lost to "mugs" in 2011 is HC
Yet he never lost to any of those people, you main argument was that Nadal's losses to "mugs" proves he has declined.
I know, I know, I already got the memo back in 2011 from Nadal fan Doomsday squad.
WTA serve, short balls, no passion, weak vamoses, no BH, terrible movement etc.
Yet the guy went to town on the field and was by and large only stopped by one single player. How the heck was this period you claimed he was playing so terrible the only time in his career that he reached 5 slam finals in a row? Why didn't it happen before?
Peak tennis on HC and grass? Yes.
On clay there was a noticeable dip in performance but even then he still won FO and lost to one man during the whole CC season.
That wasn't my question, I know a lot of people consider Fed's prime to have ended in 2007.
I was talking about what she said on Nadal's prime (that I recall).
One person? And you acted as if the few I came up with wasn't enough. Lol.
You were speaking as if people are saying that all the time, in present tense.
But hey I could have gotten the wrong impression.
No, I don't make sweeping generalizations in every 2nd post.
Separate names with a comma.