View Single Post
Old 12-08-2012, 03:17 AM   #83
The_Order
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post

typically clueless ..... the WCT/Masters were wayyyyy bigger than the AO in borg's time ....
Oh so because it was bigger than AO back then, that should count against Nadal now right? Great logic you dumbass.

IF there was a major exclusively indoor in this era, Nadal would've adapted his game to suit those conditions and won it. Proof is, you look at every major Rafa has won each of them. He doesn't/didn't play the same style at each of those majors he CLEARLY made changes for each of them to give himself a better chance at winning. Unless you want to make the argument that Rafa played clay court style and STILL managed to win each of them because that would be an even more amazing accomplishment.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
no, nadal wasn't even close to dominating grass as borg did ... that 21 year old nadal's performance in that final was probably his 2nd best performance on grass ( to the 2008 final ) ... so its not like he's put up many performances better than that ...

djoker also defeated him quite convincingly in 2011 final and rosol knocked him out early in 2012 .....
06WIM - Final def by Federer
07WIM - Final def by Federer
08WIM - Final def Federer
09WIM - DNP
10WIM - Final def Berdych
11WIM - Final

So that's 5/5 attempts making it to the final. Nadal would've had 4 WIM titles if not for having to deal with perhaps the greatest grass courter of all time.

Also, full credit to Rosol for beating Rafa, I thought he played incredible considering his ranking and Nadal was clearly not playing anywhere near his best in all his 2012 grass matches. But this doesn't mean Rafa didn't have a very dominant period on grass.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
first of all do you seriously think rafa would have come close to dominating on the fast low bouncing grass as borg did ????
Who knows? How do you know he wouldn't have? Oh wait, you're going to use the low bouncing HC performances as a guide again aren't you? LOL don't be ridiculous, if a title as important as Wimbledon was still a fast low bouncing surface, Rafa would've adapted his game from probably before turning pro and could've had every chance to dominate it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
regarding borg quitting because of mcenroe, what a load of cr*p ........ mcenroe challenged borg in 80 and borg beat him ...

borg quit because of burnout and because he was forced by the rules then to qualify for the majors if he didn't play enough tournaments ..

its unbelievable how many clueless are there who believe he quit because of mac ....

Final H2H was 7 all with zero matches on clay .... mac wouldn't stand a chance on clay vs borg except maybe in 84 .... mac was 3-1 in majors vs him, but borg was 2-0 at the masters and the masters were extremely prestigious at that time ...

connors owned borg far worse initially and he turned it around completely dominating him ...
He quit because he couldn't handle losing to McEnroe, stop being delusional. If he had won WIM in 81 he would've stuck around for longer you could put your house on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
ancic would have a decent shot at beating him in the 06 finals .... 07 , he'd most probably have won though .... and borg would have had 6 in a row if not for mac .... ( their 4-setter in 81 was as close as it gets for a 4-setter )
You say Ancic would've had a chance at beating him in 06 ROFLMFAO! Ancic couldn't carry Nadal's bags.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
right, because borg had that many chances @ HC slams as nadal did
Who's fault is that? Is that Nadal's fault? Seriously Borg could've had many more chances if he didn't put his tail between his legs and run from the sport. Not that it would've mattered anyway, he was simply not good enough to win the USO in his era anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
nadal has the edge on HC in terms of accomplishments, but playing level wise, it isn't much different and it isn't a level comparision here as borg played far far less on HC than nadal has .....
lol stop drinking your own bath water. There's no way that you can compare Nadal and Borg's playing level on HC. Rafa has beaten the godly Roger Federer in not only many HC matches, but more importantly he is UNDEFEATED against Federer in grand slam HC matches. Fed would sweep the court with Borg on a HC.

Not to mention that Novak is the best at AO since it switched to plexicushion, hasn't lost a set to Federer at AO IINM, yet Nadal who can only play on clay came within a bee's dick to beating him in the AO12 final.

Playing level wise on outdoor HC, Rafa OWNS Borg there's no doubt about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
actually you are the one who is delusional ........ but then whatever suits you

my rating of borg over nadal isn't because I'm biased or something like that, its because I have a much better perspective of history than you do ...

I rate borg only slightly behind sampras , would have rated him above him if he had won just one more slam ...

borg was no 1 for 4 years 77 to 80 ( 77 is debatable , agreed ) ( scr*w the stupid ATP rankings at that time ) , nadal only for two ..

purely open era alone, IMO, federer > ( some gap ) sampras >(marginally ) borg > (some gap ) nadal
LOL there is some gap between Nadal and Borg alright, but you've got it the wrong way around.

Anybody playing in Federer's era would've been behind him in the rankings. The fact that a 22 year old Nadal took that ranking away from Federer should be enough evidence alone of how good he is OFF clay.

Nadal owns a winning h2h against any top 10 player, more importantly in majors he owns the remaining "big 4" players apart from maybe Novak where it could be considered closer. Nadal leads that too btw 6-3.

He has beaten Federer, Novak and Murray on all 3 surfaces that the majors are played on. Those 3 cannot say the same regarding Nadal as they've NEVER beaten him on clay at RG and grass too in Murray's case since he has never beaten him at WIM either.

So Nadal has the versatility to beat the other 3 major contenders of his era at any one of those slams whereas the same cannot be said about his rivals. They cannot beat him at RG (unless he's injured of course, but I'm talking if they're all healthy) and it seems Fed can't beat him at any major at all anymore.

Now tell me Borg could beat his rivals at any major and I'll kindly point you towards Borg's failed USO campaigns lol.
The_Order is offline   Reply With Quote