Originally Posted by mandy01
yeah..and if not for a mono Fed,darkness( since every individual reacts differently to light),etc etc..just throw in any excuse.... Nadal would not have a Wimbledon.
And if not for Roger's bad back,pressure etc wtc...just throw in any excuses-Nadal would never have the Australian Open.
Man..Deluded.Deluded.Deluded.Thats the word for you *******s.
There is no logic here, in 2008 Roger did not lose as many sets in the FO as in 2009. When is the last time Roger dropped 2 sets to two people at the FO?
For Andy Roddick to be able to push Roger that hard at Wim is plain sad, Grass is Roger's best surface end of story.
Someone needs to pull up the amount of unforced errors, serve percentage etc etc and average them for 2009 and 2008.
That will tell us which year was better, at the very best they are the same.
Roger did just as well with wins etc as in 2008, only thing was different was that he did not have to play Nadal at the FO and since Roger is the #2 best clay courter he won.