View Single Post
Old 12-08-2012, 03:59 AM   #84
abmk's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: U.S
Posts: 15,583

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
no , clueless, I'm not saying it should count against nadal, rather than it should count in favour of borg, but all you can think of is rafa , rafa, rafa .... blah, blah , blah .......

you are talking about rafa's adjustments to win all the majors ? jeez, borg went from slow, grinding rallies @ the FO to SnVing frequently @ wimbledon 2 weeks later ...... this isn't to downplay rafa's adjustments to win off-clay, they were very impressive, no doubt, but borg's adjustments were far more drastic/impressive ...... he didn't adjust just to win wimbledon once or twice , he won it 5 times in a row and made the final for a 6th time !

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
06WIM - Final def by Federer
07WIM - Final def by Federer
08WIM - Final def Federer
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.
compared to borg's 6 finals in a row ( including 5 wins ), that is not "dominant"

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
you don't even understand the word dominate ....... rafa may have a won a wimbledon or two by adapting there, but he sure as hell wouldn't have dominated as borg has ... he hasn't shown that level of adaptability at all ....

hell, even on the current grass, which favors him a lot more than the old, slick grass, he hasn't come close to matching borg's achievements on grass

even hypothetically, take fed out for nadal and mac out for borg, nadal has at max 4 wimbledons, borg has 6 wimbledons .... still quite some distance ......

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
as usual , typical ignorance ( or deliberating ignoring the facts to put down borg to pump up rafa in the comparison ) ....not surprising ....

he was getting beaten worse by connors from 74-76 and turned it completely around ...he didn't have problems handling losses ...

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
You say Ancic would've had a chance at beating him in 06 ROFLMFAO! Ancic couldn't carry Nadal's bags.
typical ******* ......suppose would be saying the same about 2005 USO blake, 2006 USO youzhny or 2007 AO gonzalez, 2012 wimbledon rosol etc .... if those wins over rafa didn't didn't actually happen

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
the AO wasn't on HC till 88 .... oh and yes, he definitely had the ability to win the USO in his era , just about missed out in 80 ..... he dominated and beat connors in straights in 81 ( connors took winner mac to 5 in 80 and would win the 82 and 83 USOs )

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
LOL, typical ignorance ... djoker's wins over fed @ the AO were with

a) 2008 - mono
b) 2011 - well past his prime federer

mind you, both matches were with djoker at his very best

he was sub-par by those standards in AO 2012 ...

borg took 4 time USO winner mac to the brink in 1980 final ( just as close as nadal did vs djoker in AO 2012 final )

and dominated connors , 5 time USO winner including thrice on HC ) winning in straights in 81 USO final

not much of a difference in playing level on HC at all ....

let's talk about some of nadal's losses in HC slams as well, shall we ?

Let's take it from 2007 onwards only - gets ripped apart by gonzo in the AO 2007 QF, ferrer beats him convincingly in USO 2007, tsonga rips him apart in AO 2008, murray defeats him convincingly in USO 2008, delpo rips him apart in USO 2009, murray defeats him convincingly in AO 2010, ferrer defeats him convincingly in AO 2011 (got injured on court, so maybe excuse this one ) , djoker defeats him convincingly in USO 2011 ... .

see a lot of domination/thrashings there !

only time borg was dominated like that in a HC slam was 78 USO final ( where he was injured ) ....

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
lLOL there is some gap between Nadal and Borg alright, but you've got it the wrong way around.
umm, no .....

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
oh, he is pretty good off clay , no doubt , but he isn't better than borg off clay ...

Originally Posted by The_Order View Post
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.
yes, borg was capable of beating his rivals at any major, he beat connors and was very close to winning vs mac in 80 ..

and plainly he'd have an even better chance @ the AO on rebound or plexicushion ....

Last edited by abmk; 12-08-2012 at 04:57 AM.
abmk is online now   Reply With Quote