View Single Post
Old 12-08-2012, 09:40 PM   #124
abmk
G.O.A.T.
 
abmk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: India
Posts: 14,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisstti View Post
If you’re going to take into consideration Borg being injured, or Fed's mono, you have to for Nadal as well. You only mention AO 2011?, there have been many others. He’s won what he has (more or less equal to what Borg won) while having withdrawn from 6 slams and played injured many others (you mentioned AO 2011, there's also AO 2010, USO 2007, USO 2009...).
He's also had to withdraw several times from the WTF.
I call BS on AO 2010, he was losing anyways to murray .....

USO 2009, stomach problems or not, he'd have lost to delpo .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisstti View Post
Also, that the AO wasn’t as important back then shouldn't count against Nadal. Borg still could have played it if he chose to. Laver did and it counts high on his achievements. Same thing with having retired so early. It was his choice. All the slams Nadal has missed it hasn't been because he’s chosen to.

I think it's very close anyway, not only between them two but among all really great players.
again, a perspective on history is required to understand. AO was prestigious during Laver's time - in the 60s ...

It only declined in importance from mid-70s till the mid 80s ........ the WCT /Year ending masters were far more important at that time

essentially borg won 11 majors while playing in an era of 3 majors/year ....so to be fair to him, we'd have to take into consideration the 4th most important event - the WCT /year ending masters......

I'm not holding playing the AO against nadal, but rather those who don't have a clue about history are holding borg not playing AO against him .... the fields at the AO that time were equivalent to what you'd find in a 500 event now ...
abmk is offline   Reply With Quote