View Single Post
Old 10-10-2012, 03:49 PM   #38
90's Clay
90's Clay's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 7,100

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth View Post
Nadal's a noob? One could argue he's better than Sampras and that would make Sampras a super-noob, which would excuse his losses to noobs so you got there in the end

And when was the last time Federer lost before the QFs of a Slam? And how many times did Sampras lose to nobodies on Clay? He never even made 4 SFs in a row. Federer's made 23.

And how desperate can you get? Being in danger of losing is NOT the same as losing. So Federer can't even win matches in 5 sets now without having to face ridicule?
Nadal was a noob whipping on a peak Federer. Yes.. Sampras lost his fair share to nobodies (mostly at non slam events).. But lets not make it seem Fed has not lost to nobodies either.. Since thats simply not true. Hes also been in danger of losing to nobodies a handful of times (most notably at wimbledon over the past few years). It happens.. No one is perfect

Even nobodies can catch fire and have an "on day".

Somehow fed fans have got into this line of thinking that have has NEVER lost to a nobody now. ROFLMAO
90's Clay is offline   Reply With Quote