Originally Posted by BeGreat
that was cold. but true.
people here dismiss the fact that nadal ruined federer. forget his own health issues. doesn't matter. that's his playing style, and his own loss. he beat federer in the final of wimbledon, then in the final of australian open, and has always beaten federer in the french. but somehow, those are flukes. despite nadal's devastating consistency. i realize most of the people here are probably teens and early 20s not 30 year old dinosaurs like me. but, seriously, the general aptitude on this forum from most of the users is seriously low. i'd love to get the SAT 2 math/science scores for some of the posters. the way they interpret data is profoundly poor.
Not so. If Nadal was a better hard court player he'd have met Federer many more times in other GS finals but because he's not he just doesn't make it that far. Ironically his weakness is interpreted as a strength by the true believers here who hold on to the illusory grail of "H2H" stats as proof of divine intervention rather than a quirk of statistical probability. I did quite well in school by the way.
“There is no best. There is just the discussion of who is best. Federer, he will always be in the first part of such a discussion.” Rino Tommasi