View Single Post
Old 11-17-2012, 01:03 PM   #42
Tennis_Hands
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Inside the service box - the business end
Posts: 2,846
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustard View Post
The thread title says that Nadal and Djokovic wouldn't have survived in the 1980s and 1990s. I think it's clear that Nadal could have survived in these decades.
The thread title says "wouldn't survive", not "wouldn't be as successful".
Thread title: Nadal and Djokovic would not have survived the 80's and 90's - Becker
There were clay-court tournaments galore in these decades, where serve and volley was a lot more scarce.
Conclusion: Relevant to this discussion.
You are amusing.

The whole point of asking you, whether you understand, what Becker said , is that it should not be taken literally.

I seriously doubt, that Becker thought, that Nadal wouldn't be as successful on clay, no matter in what era. That leaves us with the surfaces outside of clay, and, since you seem to not understand a word from what he meant, he was talking about the fast and ultrafast surfaces. That is the whole point of comparing now and then, since now there are plenty of slow and medium paced HC.

Really, what exactly did you understand and argue about?
__________________
Crisstti:It's not cheating (arguable at best), it's merely breaking the rules./ Vero:Armstrong lacks the arrogance.
Tennis_Hands is offline   Reply With Quote