Why H2H is important and what it's value is

[90's Clay]

**** poor h2h against main rivals don't count when it can be used again your favorite player and fanbase essentially.


Only slam count is important but we can EASILY tear a slam count apart when you consider slams aren't all equal either.


For instance,

Theres is a bigger difference between beating prime Fed/Nole/Nadal/Murray in slams than there is beating... Baghaditis, Roddick or Gonzales for instance.

Certain players have to deal with more hardships. Look at Nadal for instance. Pretty much EVERY ONE of his slams he has had to go through a combination of PRIME or PEAK Fed, Nole, Murray to win them.


There was little to no "vacation slams" as I would call them. Fed had a few years of "vacation slams". Nole had a few years of "vacation slams". Murray had a few "vacation slams"

Thats why I value Nadal's slams a little more than the other guys because Nadal came along at a crappy time Sandwiched between prime peak Federer and prime/peak Nole. You dont think Nadal for instance would have liked to come along 4-5 years earlier or 4-5 years later? Pleaseeeeee....

Prime/Peak Nadal would gobbling every slam right now. And would have gobbled up most slams from 03-09. since if he came along earlier would only have to deal with Roddick, A bad Back Agassi, and a few tomato cans. No peak Nole around. Now he would only have to deal with Slowed down past prime Nole, Past prime Murray, and mid 30s Federer. Thats a vacation CREAMPUFF Walk for Prime/Peak Nadal. He would probably win another 2-3 extra Wimbledon titles, 2-3 extra AO titles, maybe an extra French Title, and 1-2 extra USO titles.

 

[Service Ace]

**** poor h2h against main rivals don't count when it can be used again your favorite player and fanbase essentially.


Only slam count is important but we can EASILY tear a slam count apart when you consider slams aren't all equal either.


For instance,

Theres is a bigger difference between beating prime Fed/Nole/Nadal/Murray in slams than there is beating... Baghaditis, Roddick or Gonzales for instance.

Certain players have to deal with more hardships. Look at Nadal for instance. Pretty much EVERY ONE of his slams he has had to go through a combination of PRIME or PEAK Fed, Nole, Murray to win them.


There was little to no "vacation slams" as I would call them. Fed had a few years of "vacation slams". Nole had a few years of "vacation slams". Murray had a few "vacation slams"

Thats why I value Nadal's slams a little more than the other guys because Nadal came a lot at a crappy time. You dont think Nadal for instance would have liked to come along 4-5 years earlier or 4-5 years later? Pleaseeeeee....

Prime/Peak Nadal would gobbling every slam right now. And would have gobbled up most slams from 03-09. since if he came along earlier would only have to deal with Roddick, A bad Back Agassi, and a few tomato cans. No peak Nole around. Now he would only have to deal with Slowed down past prime Nole, Past prime Murray, and mid 30s Federer. Thats a vacation CREAMPUFF Walk for Prime/Peak Nadal

NO EXCUSES

 

[metsman]

**** poor h2h against main rivals don't count when it can be used again your favorite player and fanbase essentially.


Only slam count is important but we can EASILY tear a slam count apart when you consider slams aren't all equal either.


For instance,

Theres is a bigger difference between beating prime Fed/Nole/Nadal/Murray in slams than there is beating... Baghaditis, Roddick or Gonzales for instance.

Certain players have to deal with more hardships. Look at Nadal for instance. Pretty much EVERY ONE of his slams he has had to go through a combination of PRIME or PEAK Fed, Nole, Murray to win them.


There was little to no "vacation slams" as I would call them. Fed had a few years of "vacation slams". Nole had a few years of "vacation slams". Murray had a few "vacation slams"

Thats why I value Nadal's slams a little more than the other guys because Nadal came along at a crappy time Sandwiched between prime peak Federer and prime/peak Nol. You dont think Nadal for instance would have liked to come along 4-5 years earlier or 4-5 years later? Pleaseeeeee....

Prime/Peak Nadal would gobbling every slam right now. And would have gobbled up most slams from 03-09. since if he came along earlier would only have to deal with Roddick, A bad Back Agassi, and a few tomato cans. No peak Nole around. Now he would only have to deal with Slowed down past prime Nole, Past prime Murray, and mid 30s Federer. Thats a vacation CREAMPUFF Walk for Prime/Peak Nadal. He would probably win another 2-3 extra Wimbledon titles, 2-3 extra AO titles, maybe an extra French Title, and 1-2 extra USO titles.

sounds like excuses no?

 

[90's Clay]

sounds like excuses no?

to someone ignoring realities sure? But make no mistake, Nadal had to play a combination of Prime/Peak Fed, Nole, Murray to win just about EVERY slam he won. The other "big 3" were far luckier without question.

Fed was lucky from 03-07. Nole has been lucky from 2014-present. Murray lucked out a few times.

Nadal didn't luck out at all.

 

[metsman]

to someone ignoring realities sure? But make no mistake, Nadal had to play a combination of Prime/Peak Fed, Nole, Murray to win just about EVERY slam he won. The other "big 3" were far luckier without question.

still sounds like an excuse.

 

[Zara]

I am not going to reply to any particular posts anymore as I believe this will drag on for a while and will basically go in circle.

But what I get from Federer fans in particular is that – we should give Federer the GOAT status without questioning it or looking into details, hands down. No ifs or buts. If we do then obviously we are bitter about certain things. No other possibilities can exist. It’s very much like the religious or scientific dogmatic approach – both extreme, where you can’t question anything. If you do then the responses will make a mockery out of it first in an attempt to make it completely insignificant and irrelevant - sinister even.

It's also funny how they are so reluctant to give Nadal any credit for all the titles he has won beating this very man in the finals. Truth is, this supposed GOAT did not have the balls to beat Nadal on his best surface while Nadal did exactly the opposite to Federer, who has 14 slams behind him as well - nothing to sneeze at. And yet Federer is greater on all accounts.

It’s like calling a movie a masterpiece based on its overall success without looking into any details. By that notion, Avatar or Titanic should really be called a masterpiece, while Shawshank Redemption or Citizen Kane should be a Tier 3 classic.

I personally feel a GOAT status, if there’s any (and there isn't any), should be based on quality not quantity. Quality in everything given that the so called status is so big. Sampras, Nadal or Djokovic may have achieved less than Federer but whatever they achieved I find those greater than Federer's - given all the circumstances.

 

[90's Clay]

still sounds like an excuse.

Or reality.

 

[tennisaddict]

**** poor h2h against main rivals don't count when it can be used again your favorite player and fanbase essentially.


Only slam count is important but we can EASILY tear a slam count apart when you consider slams aren't all equal either.


For instance,

Theres is a bigger difference between beating prime Fed/Nole/Nadal/Murray in slams than there is beating... Baghaditis, Roddick or Gonzales for instance.

Certain players have to deal with more hardships. Look at Nadal for instance. Pretty much EVERY ONE of his slams he has had to go through a combination of PRIME or PEAK Fed, Nole, Murray to win them.


There was little to no "vacation slams" as I would call them. Fed had a few years of "vacation slams". Nole had a few years of "vacation slams". Murray had a few "vacation slams"

Thats why I value Nadal's slams a little more than the other guys because Nadal came along at a crappy time Sandwiched between prime peak Federer and prime/peak Nol. You dont think Nadal for instance would have liked to come along 4-5 years earlier or 4-5 years later? Pleaseeeeee....

Prime/Peak Nadal would gobbling every slam right now. And would have gobbled up most slams from 03-09. since if he came along earlier would only have to deal with Roddick, A bad Back Agassi, and a few tomato cans. No peak Nole around. Now he would only have to deal with Slowed down past prime Nole, Past prime Murray, and mid 30s Federer. Thats a vacation CREAMPUFF Walk for Prime/Peak Nadal

Unfortunately for Rafa he has to play 6 matches before he can reach a final.

All through his career that has been a struggle .

Remember Rafa has just reached way below finals + SF than either Fed or Novak

Era is not going to help if you lose to Rosol, Pouille ,Fognini, Gonzalez, Blake and Darcis

 

[tennisaddict]

NO EXCUSES

NUFF said

 

[sarmpas]

NO EXCUSES

I don't want to hear it.

 

[Service Ace]

I am not going to reply to any particular posts anymore as I believe this will drag on for a while and will basically go in circle.

But what I get from Federer fans in particular is that – we should give Federer the GOAT status without questioning it or looking into details, hands down. No ifs or buts. If we do then obviously we are bitter about certain things. No other possibilities can exist. It’s very much like the religious or scientific dogmatic approach – both extreme, where you can’t question anything. If you do then the responses will make a mockery out of it first in an attempt to make it completely insignificant and irrelevant - sinister even.

It's also funny how they are so reluctant to give Nadal any credit for all the titles he has won beating this very man in the finals. Truth is, this supposed GOAT did not have the balls to beat Nadal on his best surface while Nadal did exactly the opposite to Federer, who has 14 slams behind him as well - nothing to sneeze at. And yet Federer is greater on all accounts.

It’s like calling a movie a masterpiece based on its overall success without looking into any details. By that notion, Avatar or Titanic should really be called a masterpiece, while Shawshank Redemption or Citizen Kane should be a Tier 3 classic.

I personally feel a GOAT status, if there’s any (and there isn't any), should be based on quality not quantity. Quality in everything given that the so called status is so big. Sampras, Nadal or Djokovic may have achieved less than Federer but whatever they achieved I find those greater than Federer's given all the circumstances.

So basically, you, like every other hater, penalize Federer for being so far ahead of the rest of his competition that he makes them look pedestrian. Meanwhile, we should award career runner ups like Nadal for being able to beat the best when they decide to show up and overlook the fact that he loses to absolute scrubs, demonstrating no consistency in a game that is fundamentally about being consistent.

You don't understand tennis and you don't understand the goals of sports.

 

[KINGROGER]

to someone ignoring realities sure? But make no mistake, Nadal had to play a combination of Prime/Peak Fed, Nole, Murray to win just about EVERY slam he won. The other "big 3" were far luckier without question.

Fed was lucky from 03-07. Nole has been lucky from 2014-present. Murray lucked out a few times.

Nadal didn't luck out at all.

Nadal losing to the likes of Murray x2, Ferrerx2, Tsonga, Gonzalez, Rosol, Darcis, Washed up Hewitt, Youzny, Blake, Brown, Krygios etc negates all that crap about 'weak era'

All he had to do was beat the above mugs, and since he supposedly had Djokovic and Fed's number only had to win half of those to end up with 20+ slams.

Nadal only has 14 because of the embarrassing losses during his prime. Nothing else.

 

[90's Clay]

Nadal losing to the likes of Murray x2, Ferrerx2, Tsonga, Gonzalez, Rosol, Darcis, Washed up Hewitt, Youzny, Blake, Brown, Krygios etc negates all that crap about 'weak era'

All he had to do was beat the above mugs, and since he supposedly had Djokovic and Fed's number only had to win half of those to end up with 20+ slams.

Nadal only has 14 because of the embarrassing losses during his prime. Nothing else.

Nadal only has 14 because of injuries and being sandwiched between Fed and Nole. Righhttt. Im sure Peak Nole coming on like a house of fire in early 2011 had nothing to do with it.

You dont think Rafa would rather only have to deal with Bad Back Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, Baghaditis in slam finals or Dimitrov and Raonic now???

Pre-08 Nadal wasn't in his all surface prime so I dont count much of 05-07 anyways. He didn't his stride on all surfaces yet.

 

[Zara]

So basically, you, like every other hater, penalize Federer for being so far ahead of the rest of his competition that he makes them look pedestrian. Meanwhile, we should award career runner ups like Nadal for being able to beat the best when they decide to show up and overlook the fact that he loses to absolute scrubs, demonstrating no consistency in a game that is fundamentally about being consistent.

You don't understand tennis and you don't understand the goals of sports.

Well, the runner ups like Nadal did give a pretty good run for his money making him cry like a baby at 2009 AO. But like every other hater, you want to go and undermine Nadal's achievement over Federer.

See, this can go both ways and it does go both ways. By the same token, you are not only a complete hater but also a complete fanatic.

 

[KINGROGER]

Nadal only has 14 because of injuries and being sandwiched between Fed and Nole. Righhttt. Im sure Peak Nole coming on like a house of fire in early 2011 had nothing to do with it.

You dont think Rafa would rather only have to deal with Bad Back Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, Baghaditis in slam finals or Dimitrov and Raonic now???

Pre-08 Nadal wasn't in his all surface prime so I dont count much of 05-07 anyways. He didn't his stride on all surfaces yet.

What the hell does Fed and Nole have to do with Rafa losing to Murray x2, Ferrerx2, Tsonga, Gonzalez, Rosol, Darcis, Washed up Hewitt, Youzny, Blake, Brown, Krygios at slams???

Gonzalez??? LOL what? He actually beat Rafa at the 07 AO ..... Hewitt?? Again, even washed up managed to beat Nadal at a slam.

The same Nadal who lost to FERRER and MURRAY twice LMAO that's why he's stuck on 14. ZERO to do with having to face Fed or Novak.


Fed would NEVER lose to any of that list above in his prime.

As for the bolded part... irrelevant at AO as he lost to his pigeon Ferrer lmao. Then he beat his pigeon Federer at RG so Djokovic doesn't factor in.

 

[Hitman's Gurl]

Nadal only has 14 because of injuries and being sandwiched between Fed and Nole. Righhttt. Im sure Peak Nole coming on like a house of fire in early 2011 had nothing to do with it.

You dont think Rafa would rather only have to deal with Bad Back Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, Baghaditis in slam finals or Dimitrov and Raonic now???

Pre-08 Nadal wasn't in his all surface prime so I dont count much of 05-07 anyways. He didn't his stride on all surfaces yet.

You really don't like Roger, do you? I thought Pete fans would like Roger because they are so much alike. I liked Pete as a child and then went to Roger.

 

[Zara]

So basically, you, like every other hater, penalize Federer for being so far ahead of the rest of his competition that he makes them look pedestrian. Meanwhile, we should award career runner ups like Nadal for being able to beat the best when they decide to show up and overlook the fact that he loses to absolute scrubs, demonstrating no consistency in a game that is fundamentally about being consistent.

You don't understand tennis and you don't understand the goals of sports.[/QUOTE]

And yes, you are right. Anyone who does not worship Federer and worships scumbags like Sampras or Nadal or Djokovic have least understanding of Tennis and goals of sports.

We are after all mere mortals. While you will go on and continue to live on forever.

 

[KINGROGER]

Well, the runner ups like Nadal did give a pretty good run for his money making him cry like a baby at 2009 AO. But like every other hater, you want to go and undermine Nadal's achievement over Federer.

See, this can go both ways and it does go both ways. By the same token, you are not only a complete hater but also a complete fanatic.

What exactly is your point? Yes peak Nadal scored a good win over post peak but prime Fed. This gained him an AO title. Fed still has 5 none the less so he's better there...

 

[Blocker]

An interesting take at how important the H2H is to look at how much its stands the test of time. Take Becker and Edberg.

It's well known that both won 6 slams each. Both of them have been n°1. Edberg for a longer time than Becker. Edberg has been year end n°1 twice, Becker none. Edberg won 41 titles, Becker 49. These players are considered equals in all discussions.

Becker leads the H2H 25-10. Nobody care.

Nobody cares because Edberg won the slam H2H count which squares it. Becker won the total H2H, Edberg won the slam H2H, draw, hence why nobody cares.

 

[falstaff78]

this thread is making me want to re-read the REAL SLAM thread.

 

[tennisaddict]

Nadal only has 14 because of injuries and being sandwiched between Fed and Nole. Righhttt. Im sure Peak Nole coming on like a house of fire in early 2011 had nothing to do with it.

You dont think Rafa would rather only have to deal with Bad Back Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, Baghaditis in slam finals or Dimitrov and Raonic now???

Pre-08 Nadal wasn't in his all surface prime so I dont count much of 05-07 anyways. He didn't his stride on all surfaces yet.

Well, you want Rafa to win 21 out of 21 finals he made ? That is asking for too much . Already he won 14 of 21 which is pretty good.

If you make 28-30 finals , then you can expect to have easier opponents . And Rafa did get Ferrer, Berdych and pigeon Fed. Why are you complaining ?

 

[Blocker]

Correct. Laver for GOAT, I say.



Not correct. Nadal does not have enough top title wins (18>14, 6>0).

Besides, Sampras not winning RG automatically removes him from the conversation. Agassi showed that it was possible to win the Career Slam even back then, so no excuses: no Career Slam = no GOAT.

I did not mention GOATs in my op you clown. Since you love talking about goats so much, why don't you adopt one as a pet. Hope it poops all over your floor.

Goat can't be determined, look at Borg and what he achieved in half the time Fed has been around. How can you compare that? You can't, so no goat.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

H2H languishes for one reason alone: It was always nothing more than a discarded chemical compound that was coopted by sports stats wonks.

Poor H2H; no laboratory love. And the most romantic of Hallmark holidays just around the bend, too.

 

[tennisaddict]

I did not mention GOATs in my op you clown. Since you love talking about goats so much, why don't you adopt one as a pet. Hope it poops all over your floor.

Goat can't be determined, look at Borg and what he achieved in half the time Fed has been around. How can you compare that? You can't, so no goat.

Blocker , if you finish 50 meters in 2 seconds in a 100 meter race and you trip over , there are no consolation prizes

 

[Zara]

What exactly is your point? Yes peak Nadal scored a good win over post peak but prime Fed. This gained him an AO title. Fed still has 5 none the less so he's better there...

That was 3 losses in a row for Federer in slam finals to the same person. That's why he cried because he hadn't broken Sampras' record yet and this man called Nadal kept getting in the way. It was a huge factor that you now want to overlook because he has 18 slams. Thanks to Soderling of course who put Federer in the GOAT bracket.

It's okay if you don't want to acknowledge Nadal's contributions to tennis if the GOAT thing is the only thing in your mind and if the overall results is all you cared about, but us mere mortals are in good standing to recognize it and are willing to give Nadal his due.

 

[Blocker]

Blocker , if you finish 50 meters in 2 seconds in a 100 meter race and you trip over , there are no consolation prizes

Addict, if you're implying that Borg tripped over and therefore cannot be considered GOAT, then that's a poor analogy. You see, Borg did not know he was in a race.

 

[Fedfan34]

**** poor h2h against main rivals don't count when it can be used again your favorite player and fanbase essentially.


Only slam count is important but we can EASILY tear a slam count apart when you consider slams aren't all equal either.


For instance,

Theres is a bigger difference between beating prime Fed/Nole/Nadal/Murray in slams than there is beating... Baghaditis, Roddick or Gonzales for instance.

Certain players have to deal with more hardships. Look at Nadal for instance. Pretty much EVERY ONE of his slams he has had to go through a combination of PRIME or PEAK Fed, Nole, Murray to win them.


There was little to no "vacation slams" as I would call them. Fed had a few years of "vacation slams". Nole had a few years of "vacation slams". Murray had a few "vacation slams"

Thats why I value Nadal's slams a little more than the other guys because Nadal came along at a crappy time Sandwiched between prime peak Federer and prime/peak Nole. You dont think Nadal for instance would have liked to come along 4-5 years earlier or 4-5 years later? Pleaseeeeee....

Prime/Peak Nadal would gobbling every slam right now. And would have gobbled up most slams from 03-09. since if he came along earlier would only have to deal with Roddick, A bad Back Agassi, and a few tomato cans. No peak Nole around. Now he would only have to deal with Slowed down past prime Nole, Past prime Murray, and mid 30s Federer. Thats a vacation CREAMPUFF Walk for Prime/Peak Nadal. He would probably win another 2-3 extra Wimbledon titles, 2-3 extra AO titles, maybe an extra French Title, and 1-2 extra USO titles.

Agree, which is why Pete should only be given 3-4 slams tops. He won his slams against goobers and rink dink players who were specialists not just of a different surface than the one he played them on, but the exact OPPOSITE surface of the one he played them on. He wins maybe 5 slams in Mac's era of actual competitiveness. Sadly going forward in time doesn't help his case either, as he was also crushed by Fed's pigeons in the finals of a slam that was completely in his favor. If you were crushed by someone's puppy, you can only imagine what the owner will do to you.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I did not mention GOATs in my op you clown. Since you love talking about goats so much, why don't you adopt one as a pet. Hope it poops all over your floor.

Goat can't be determined, look at Borg and what he achieved in half the time Fed has been around. How can you compare that? You can't, so no goat.

I don't think old Pete cares about greatness values nearly as much as you do. He is universally acknowledged (and respected in real life) as an extremely great player. Why bother arguing for more?

 

[tennisaddict]

Addict, if you're implying that Borg tripped over and therefore cannot be considered GOAT, then that's a poor analogy. You see, Borg did not know he was in a race.

He should have known. VIsionaries know what lies ahead . case in point, Rogi did not stop at Wimb 09

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

It's okay if you don't want to acknowledge Nadal's contributions to tennis if the GOAT thing is the only thing in your mind and if the overall results is all you cared about, but us mere mortals are in good standing to recognize it and are willing to give Nadal his due.

What contributions other than those already reflected in his results and clay god status?

 

[Fedfan34]

I don't think old Pete cares about greatness values nearly as much as you do. He is universally acknowledged (and respected in real life) as an extremely great player. Why bother arguing for more?

I beg to differ. He was constantly in the news surrounding his slam count when Fed was approaching it, starting playing some exhibition matches against low level pros in the mid 2000s to re-assert his relevancy, and then did some exhos against Rogi himself - at least 4 that I'm aware of. He was definitely trying to remind people who the slam king still was at the time.

 

[Fedfan34]

Nadal only has 14 because of injuries and being sandwiched between Fed and Nole. Righhttt. Im sure Peak Nole coming on like a house of fire in early 2011 had nothing to do with it.

You dont think Rafa would rather only have to deal with Bad Back Agassi, Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, Baghaditis in slam finals or Dimitrov and Raonic now???

Pre-08 Nadal wasn't in his all surface prime so I dont count much of 05-07 anyways. He didn't his stride on all surfaces yet.

I think Rafa would definitely rather deal with a field where his main competitor is Methassi who's absent during the height of his prime and takes years to be a threat again.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I beg to differ. He was constantly in the news surrounding his slam count when Fed was approaching it, starting playing some exhibition matches against low level pros in the mid 2000s to re-assert his relevancy, and then did some exhos against Rogi himself - at least 4 that I'm aware of. He was definitely trying to remind people who the slam king still was at the time.

Well, at least now that he's been comprehensively eclipsed, Pete's not acting all butthurt about that, not that I heard, or what?

 

[Fedfan34]

Well, at least now that he's been comprehensively eclipsed, Pete's not acting all butthurt about that, not that I heard, or what?

That is true. Pete was a great sport for showing up at Wimby 2009 when Roger broke his record. He was protective of his record, and understandably so, but he definitely does care about his standing in the game's history. He even devoted time to talking about it in his book.

 

[Blocker]

He should have known. VIsionaries know what lies ahead . case in point, Rogi did not stop at Wimb 09

Addict, in 1981 the term GOAT did not exist. This forum did not exist. The internet to allow this forum to exist did not exist, racking up as many slams as you can before you die (note, not retire, but die) did not exist, otherwise he would have gone to Melbs every year. It is certainly a race now, but not then. Remember, 'gay' once meant happy. Things change.

 

[Zara]

I don't think old Pete cares about greatness values nearly as much as you do. He is universally acknowledged (and respected in real life) as an extremely great player. Why bother arguing for more?

Actually. I agree with this that Pete truly doesn't care and he shouldn't. I see GOAT coming from different eras, really. For example, I find Lever as the GOAT in his time, Borg, then Sampras, Federer and Nadal in the same era for me, and now Djokovic. And if God's willing, Murray next!!

 

[Blocker]

I don't think old Pete cares about greatness values nearly as much as you do. He is universally acknowledged (and respected in real life) as an extremely great player. Why bother arguing for more?

I' miss not a Sampras fan, why you mentioning him to me for?

 

[Blocker]

Well, at least now that he's been comprehensively eclipsed, Pete's not acting all butthurt about that, not that I heard, or what?

Totally eclipsed? Oi jackass, Sampras beat Federer in his retirement.

 

[-NN-]

Actually. I agree with this that Pete truly doesn't care and he shouldn't. I see GOAT coming from different eras, really. For example, I find Lever as the GOAT in his time, Borg, then Sampras, Federer and Nadal in the same era for me, and now Djokovic. And if God's willing, Murray next!!

Murray isn't next (as a GOAT). Sorry to tell you that mate.

 

[Zara]

I beg to differ. He was constantly in the news surrounding his slam count when Fed was approaching it, starting playing some exhibition matches against low level pros in the mid 2000s to re-assert his relevancy, and then did some exhos against Rogi himself - at least 4 that I'm aware of. He was definitely trying to remind people who the slam king still was at the time.

That's such nonsense, Fedfan. Pete really loves tennis and he likes Federer too. He is smart enough to know that he can't prove anything in exhibitions matches of all matches. Why see him intellectually so dense?

Sampras however does wonder (if I feel I can read his mind) from time to time as to how he would have fared against Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray etc. It's an usual curiosity as he was a big match player and loved the big stages of tennis. Don't please mix it up with your ego.

 

[Zara]

Murray isn't next (as a GOAT). Sorry to tell you that mate.

Well, I deny logic and reasons. I accept dream and fantasy. Who are you to tell me otherwise?

 

[Fedfan34]

Don't please mix it up with your ego.

Sampras however does wonder (if I feel I can read his mind)

 

[-NN-]

Well, I deny logic and reasons. I accept dream and fantasy. Who are you to tell me otherwise?

Watch my prophecy unfold. He can get to Edberg, Wilander, Becker perhaps. I don't think he's that far away, which I know is an unpopular opinion on this forum.

 

[Zara]

]

Your GIF is stupid. lol. But did you not imply the same though as if you could read his mind, that he was trying to prove that he was still the goat by playing some exos? lol

 

[Zara]

Watch my prophecy unfold. He can get to Edberg, Wilander, Becker perhaps. I don't think he's that far away, which I know is an unpopular opinion on this forum.

I am aiming Agassi at the moment. Maybe we should talk again in 3 years time.

 

[-NN-]

I am aiming Agassi at the moment. Maybe we should talk again in 3 years time.

We definitely should.

 

[Zara]

We definitely should.

Dinner on you then. Keep the wallet fat but not yourself.

 

[Fedfan34]

Your GIF is stupid. lol. But did you not imply the same though as if you could read his mind, that he was trying to prove that he was still the goat by playing some exos? lol

You can infer intent based on someone's actions without needing access to their mind. This is how historians analyze revolutions, how soldiers are trained in combat, and how clear minded folks make important decisions. This is also common sense 101.

Explicitly stating you're reading someone's mind puts you in fantasy land. Maybe you can help Indie find the Crystal Skull while you're at it?

 

[tennisaddict]

Addict, in 1981 the term GOAT did not exist. This forum did not exist. The internet to allow this forum to exist did not exist, racking up as many slams as you can before you die (note, not retire, but die) did not exist, otherwise he would have gone to Melbs every year. It is certainly a race now, but not then. Remember, 'gay' once meant happy. Things change.

Slam counts were not important then but slams indeed were

 

[metsman]

Or reality.

or an excuse