View Single Post
Old 07-01-2012, 01:43 PM   #46
NadalAgassi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
no, you fail here .... hard courts are the most neutral surface as far as playing styles are concerned. Hence competition is the toughest ....
It is not the faults of Laver, Court, Connolly, and Budge that slams were played on grass or clay then. They won all the slams on the surfaces they were held in and thus won the Grand Slam. If one wants to get subjective the fact of the matter is the super all court and well rounded games of Laver and Court, probably the most complete players in history, would have been all that much tougher to beat on hard courts. As for Connolly her murderous and error proof ground game, probably the best in history considering the time she played in, would have been all that much tougher on hard courts too.


Quote:
err, what a load of BS. federer didn't have weak competition at wimbledon, neither did rafa at the FO .....both faced full or near full fields ...... not the case with Court's slams at the AO , many of which were poorly attended
Just because they were "full fields" does not mean they were good ones. It is a well known fact Federer has no competition on grass, and likewise Nadal on clay. Who did Federer have to face on grass besides Nadal in 2007 and 2008 (and baby then grass mug Nadal in 2006 who should have been straight setted by Kendrick but rose through the nothing draw this eras nothing grass fields commonly produces to the final by some miracle). Andy Roddick his pigeon of pigeons, Sebastien Grosjean, Hewitt in the twilight of his years as a top player and another huge Federer pigeon, Richard Gasquet? As for Nadal on clay he only has to beat his pigeon Federer, Djokovic the last year or two, and other than that who, Nikolay Davydenko the hard courter and slam choker, Tommy Robredo, David Ferrer.

Margaret Court even with the half fields in Australia faced as much competition as that in atleast half of her wins. More specifically in comparision to Graf who did she face once Seles was stabbed? Sanchez Vicario who probably would have been a 1 slam winner without the stabbing and is considered less talented than even Sabatini, another 1 slam winner of the Graf era who had the misfortune to peak at the same time as Graf and Seles. Sabatini herself was on massive career decline by then and not a contender. The aging Naratilova was now reaching the point she wasnt even a contender anymore too. Capriati burnt out and was off the tour awhile. Fernandez was constantly injured and not contending ever again after the 93 French. So Sanchez, young erratic Pierce, headcase Novotna, and Conchita Martinez, that was it, until Hingis and a then grossly overweight Davenport began to emerge, and an overweight weaker Seles returned.




Quote:
all subjective as to how much she would've won without the stabbing ....
Of course but the Seles stabbing is not just any what if. It is not a what if like a person getting injured or ill, or a personal problem. It is a one time situation that has never happened before in any sport, an athlete being injured in the coruse of battle with the intent to help another athlete. It undeniably casts a cloud over the beneficiary.

Last edited by NadalAgassi : 07-01-2012 at 01:45 PM.
  Reply With Quote