Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by surfvland, Jul 22, 2013.
I think Fed has at least 2 more slams in him.
Nadal had chances to beat Djokovic before a fifth set.
He will take max 17 not more
1WIMBY(don't forget twice champion here )
if he played 3 more tours its not difficult
OP should be applauded for his original thread. So pertinent to today's affairs.
It's so easy to re-write history. Nadal was leading by a set and a break, he gave Novak a bread stick in the third set and served for the match in the 4th. Novak only lead briefly in the fifth and Nadal broke him to love to win the match.
If he Rafa is healthy and plays tennis till the age of which Federer retires then definitely.
Everyone and even the commentators said it was a difficult loss for Nole since he was in the driver seat in the 5th set. The loss hurts because that one single play(Nole touch the net) made a difference between a win and a loss. You know that.
Let's put it this way, its highly unlikely for RNadal to surpass RFederer, but if he does he'll be surely hailed as the greatest of the open era.
Yeah, if Nadal does get to 18 Slams, he'll have a better case than any other player to being the GOAT, IMO. But if he just gets 16 or 17, Federer still takes it easily.
Are you joking, or don't you follow tennis? McEnroe already hailed Nadal as greater than Federer. Courier too has leaned toward Nadal. Nothing can change that, now that Federer is sliding into obscurity and Nadal continues the record winning streak (9 consecutive slam-winning years).
No they didn't hail him over Roger. Even if they did, so what? One or two comments means nothing to the masses. I've heard a few biased commentators argued that Kobe is comparable to Jordan, but that doesn't change the fact that Jordan is still widely considered the greatest.
Agree. So easy to beat a 32 yr old dude! If I just step in today as a tennis fan, I would probably ask "Fed who?". He lost at the 2nd round of Wimby, SF at some obscure 250pt tourney, having a bad back, shanking all his FH, cannot even serve, cannot even volley... Fed who?, right? Probably BigMac and Courier can triple bagel this 32 yr old dude too. No wonder why they lean toward Rafa.
I actually enjoy all this bandwagoning and artificially inflating the importance of the players of the day by some former Greats.
It makes me feel better to know, that my opinion on some tennis matters is actually superior (i.e. reflects the reality better and is more balanced) to that of tennis Greats like McEnroe. I am not dependend on saying BS to earn my money, unlike Mac.
Yup! So easy to beat up on or heap critics on someone at the end of their respective career, yes? I wonder if all these guys received the same treatment of their respective careers, and now turn around for a bit of sweet revenge.
To the OP question, I'd say the next FO may be Rafa. Although I think Djoker will find a way to win next year. Outside of FO, everything is with a question mark? Perhaps, everything outside of FO is icing on the cake for Rafa and his fans. And with that in mind, I strongly doubt Rafa will reach and surpass 17 GS titles.
Nads will be very lucky if he can get to 13. Two consecutive early round exits at his second best slam clearly suggest a career in steep decline. There's also the fact that he was one lucky net touch away from losing at RG.
And there's also the upcoming introduction of biological passports in tennis.
It's an Alexander NevSKy account. Of course it will post that! :lol:
He has 3 in 10 meetings, Nadal has 4 in 12 meetings.
Keeping in mind that Nadal has only beaten Novak on clay since 2011 while Fed scored a win on 3 different surfaces (clay, HC and grass) and that in 2011 Nadal lost 7 straight times while Fed beat him at FO and had MPs against him at USO (while Nadal went down meekly in 4 sets) you could say that in Novak's best year Fed was the biggest threat to him, not Nadal.
Also considering that Nadal was 24 and Fed 29 when Novak started his 2.0 form if you're gonna penalize Fed for not handling new Novak all that well, then that goes double for Nadal.
Excellent poast. One slight misstatement:
Nads has failed to register a victory over Djoker on any other surface than clay since late 2010.
Add to this the fact that Nads failed to beat Djok, full stop, in 2011 while Federer succeeded in ending one of the greatest streaks in the history of the sport.
Nads is first and foremost a clay court specialist who had two lucky seasons after Federer got mono and moved out of his physical prime.
He'll go down in history as a career rankings bridesmaid to Rog and Nole.
The ****s are out in force today! Excited about Brisbane?
Nah, he beat Novak in 2010 USO final and in their 2010 WTF RR match.
True, that is very telling (especially considering as I previously mentioned the different stages of the career of Fed and Nadal at that point).
Have to disagree with that, Nadal has had too far much success off clay over the course of his career for me to consider him a CC specialist.
Too early to tell but quite possible, yes.
Of course, I for one can barely wait.
Shame your favourite word is now censored, yes? Poor JV.
If there were such a things as a "lock" in tennis it would be Nadal at the French.
Fair enough, we can disagree. The only points I'll make are that in his second most successful slam he's only won it 2x, and the vast majority of his titles are clay-based.
If he was truly an all-surface player, by now he reasonably should have won several indoor titles.
Only to the Nadochists.
He certainly wasn't a lock in '11, and certainly wasn't a lock this year.
Both years must be regarded as the product of some tremendously lucky breaks. The fact that a non-surface specialist has been beating him on clay -- including being one lucky net touch away from goring him this year -- means that those days are over.
He may, however, still be a lock in 500s and 250s. :lol:
The point is that he won 4 slams off clay which isn't much compared to a person of his stature, but most people would work their a** off to win 4 slams anywhere. He is definitely the best ever on clay, but keeping that aside, he is a GOOD player even off clay.
Remember his winning on clay doesn't diminish his achievement off clay. Even if he wins 100 RGs, he'll still have those 4 slams off clay to his name.
Lol well remember, the Nad Trolls don't regard WTF matches as anything other than exhibitions!! :lol:
So by their standards, it's September 2010! :lol:
I truly believe that one day there will be an asterisk beside his records. But we'll see.
Your poast also brings up one of the most hilarious inconsistencies of the Nad Trolls. They seek to belittle Fred's accomplishments by using one set of standards, and hail Nads' by using another, often contradictory one.
And the circle goes on. :lol:
And on and on they go!! :lol:
Some of them are blinded by myopia, while others rage in their hatred towards Federer.
No matter -- they're just funny. :lol:
I know, but unlike them I don't hate anyone specially their boy. I give RNadal the credit he deserves for whatever he has achieved unlike the RNadal trollboys who says for example, 1 OG >>>>> 500 WTF (lol, seriously I don't know what to reply)
Yeah I know.
Their hatred towards Federer is truly, uniquely hilarious. If they actually gave Federer his due, they could make a much stronger argument for their guy having a very special place in the sport's history. But no!
The other thing that's interesting is what kind of fans each player attracts. The worst of the Nadochists troll obsessively, routinely spew hate, and are perfectly willing to overlook illegal coaching, routine gamesmanship, injury exaggeration, and even reasonable grounds for suspicion that he may be cheating in other ways.
Similarly, when a journalist said something mildly critical of Nads, she was shocked to subsequently receive hate mail!
Well, they have to use contradictions and circular reasoning. How else can you explain 12 is greater than 17. Along with tons of other stuff.
It's a catch 22. Fed wins too much, nobody could challenge him. Fed has a challenge wins a bit less, he isn't good enough.
Also some people love to argue and go against the majority just for the sake of it.
But it's funny. Sometimes reading TW is better than watching a great comedy movie.
Rafa also possesses a career slam to match Fed, which will become more profound if he overtakes Fed in total slams.
He might surpass Emerson's 12 slams though.
Interesting..a little over 20% think he can surpass Fed. Which would be a tall order.
21 people. Or perhaps we should say 21 accounts.
Wish he had made the polls public,would've been interesting to see who these wonderful folks are. :lol:
I think He has a very decent chance of surpassing Fed's 17 GS, and that would be even stronger should he win USO '13.
You are suggesting some posters on this forum have multiple accounts?
Just goes to show how ridiculous the commentators' logic is. Djokovic touched the net in the 3rd or 4th set? They played numerous games after that, a loss cannot be attributed to one bad point. He had plenty of time to make up for that, and even had a break in the 5th, before Nadal broke back, and then crushed him in the final game to take the match. The stats in the
5th set when the match was on the line says it all.
That's similar to the Wimbledon final 2008. Federer fought gallantly, but when the match was on the line and darkness was falling Rafa took matters into his own hands and upped his game. It would be ridiculous to go all the way to something that happened in the 3rd set and say that was the cause of Fed's loss.
Those commentators don't have the brains God gave a billy goat. What a lame conclusion they came to. Pathetic line of reasoning, and the main reason they have zero credibility.
8 of Nadal's 12 slams are at the FO, on the surface he is the best in history on. His main competition has been Federer a weak era champion whose worst surface happens to be clay and Djokovic, neither are among the top 10 greatest claycourters of all time. Weak clay era benefactor = Nadal.
Besides that Djokovic of 2010 was in the worst form of his career since he became a top player, his playing level in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2008, 2007 and even 2009 was higher. So why he counts as strong competition but Roddick of 2004 doesn't is complete BS.
Nadal won all of his slams in the same period as Federer won 13, he faced the same competition. If he had peaked on grass and hards at the same time as Federer he would have no US Opens and at best a single Wimbledon.
So you are saying that if Michael Chang, and Sergi Bruegera were still playing Nadal would have fewer slams? LOL
No,just curious who the pro-Nadal voters are. :twisted:
the touch in the net was in the 5th set, when novak was a break up.
Wow... approaching 25% of the vote for Rafa.
Also, why do people just assume Fed stays at 17?
Given the way he's playing this year it's unlikely he'll add to his tally.
Yeah, they also assumed Fed stays at 16 after his 2010 AO since he was in a long drought.
As stated earlier in this thread. I think Fed has 2 more slams in him.
Well, things change quickly in tennis. Also he is motivated still. He just loves tennis so much.
I think because of this and his easy style and talent, he will be able to add at least 1 more major. He is burned now. But he can take a rest and come back stronger.
Separate names with a comma.