View Single Post
Old 12-02-2012, 12:41 PM   #24
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,268

Nadal has 11 slams and counting (Agassi only 8 and he couldn't beat Pete at 2 of the 4 slams no matter how hard he tried and Nadal has taken Fed out at 3 of the 4 slams)
We're not talking about who the better player is, but of the seperation between the two, so who cares that Nadal has 3 more slams? Federer also has 3 more than Sampras.

Even if the seperation is bigger, it's not by a massive margin at this point. Federer is clearly the player of his era. Sampras was clearly the player of his. Federer also had a stronger number 2 and 3 players of the era to contend with, as Nadal + Djokovic > Agassi + Courier (maybe it was Becker, in which case it would be very close, but Becker wasn't the same force he was when Sampras started winning compared to his prime).

and he is much worse indoors (and on hard courts) then Agassi was. Agassi was better on more various surfaces overall then Nadal is where most of Nadal's success has came on clay.
Do you, then, disagree that Nadal is a better player than Agassi? If not, I don't see what you're arguing about.

Also, how was he better on more surfaces? Nadal is much better on grass, and so so much better on clay. Agassi was much better on HC and indoors, but not by the same margin.

Last edited by TheFifthSet; 12-02-2012 at 12:43 PM.
TheFifthSet is offline   Reply With Quote