View Single Post
Old 10-07-2012, 07:00 AM   #234
Cup8489
Legend
 
Cup8489's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Silvis, IL
Posts: 8,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Knight View Post
No.....but some yes. For example he won two wimbys in a row. He was then to injured and/or personal issues with his parents and couldn't play the third year to defend his title .
No he didn't. He won 2008 Wimbledon 9-7 in the fifth, did not play 2009, won 2010. Get your facts straight. And that's a huge excuse for him to not defend his title.. Why do you make so many excuses for Nadal? You make more excuses than he does.. and in fact undermine his legendary determination by suggesting that something like personal issues with his parents would force him to SKIP a MAJOR.

Quote:
Federer was the direct beneficiary and faced Roddick I'm the final for the fourth time.
And Roddick was a worthy opponent. Don't act like the guy can't play tennis. I guess Rafa was lucky that he didn't have to play peak Djokovic for his whole career... he'd be a few majors short of what he is now.

Quote:
Yes Roger won that wimby and that's another wimby for the record books......but the defending champion was not in that tournament.
Ok so you're suggesting that everytime that someone DOESN'T beat the defending champion it shouldn't count? That would strip Nadal of nearly all his majors, bub. All his FO's, his AO, his USO, one Wimbledon. So he'd be sitting with one major.

LOL.

Quote:
I think on paper it looks beautiful for Fed but on paper it was a hollow win because the defending champion wasn't even in the tournament .

See above. You're really awful at making arguments.. they have no connection to reality LOL.
__________________
"And what if there IS a difference? The fact is I heard a difference, regardless if there actually is a difference or not."
Cup8489 is offline   Reply With Quote