View Single Post
Old 12-08-2012, 09:49 PM   #125
The_Order
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 .......
Not true at all, it's just another one of your stupid assumptions. I hardly post on here, yet somehow all I've got on my mind is Rafa. LOL. then I look at your post count and see you spend the majority of your life on here and yet again LOL. Then I realise that the majority of your "discussions" are anti-Nadal and ROFLMAFAO. Keep it up.

Face it Borg couldn't adjust his game to defeat his rivals at the USO. Rafa did. And he adjusted to defeat his rivals at the AO and at WIM as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 !
Yes genius I was talking about ALL the majors, you know something Mr.Borg failed to do? If you find it more impressive to win 2 out of 4 majors than to win 4/4 than all you're doing is revealing your stupid logic and anti-Nadal agenda. Seriously did Nadal steal your goat when you were a kid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
compared to borg's 6 finals in a row ( including 5 wins ), that is not "dominant"
Again Borg didn't have to play against Federer did he? so that including 5 wins in your brackets there means sfa. He wouldn't have had 5 wins in a row if he had to meet Fed in the finals 3 years in a row lol.

So Borg's 6 finals in a row vs Nadal 5 finals in a row (and yes it was 5 in a row in terms of when he played). They are both dominant periods on grass.

If he didn't have to meet Fed in the finals he would've had 4 Wimbledon titles and been only 1 behind Borg, just like if Borg had to play Fed 3 years in a row he would've most likely lost 2/3 to him and been left with 3 WIM titles instead of 5.

Point is Rafa was still very young and he had to deal with probably the greatest grass courter of all time when he was in his prime and he STILL almost won 2 out of those 3 encounters. Go and ask Federer how bad Nadal is on grass.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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
I've already gone over this stuff, feel free to read above again in case you still don't get it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 ......
Now let's do the fair thing and add Fed to Borg's path and we'll add McEnroe to Nadal's path from 2011 onwards. Rafa has 4 WIM's and Borg has at most 3.

BTW we add McEnroe from 2011 onwards because he wasn't a threat until later on in Borg's WIM run.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 ...
But Wimbledon was to him "his home" and losing there is what tore him apart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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
WTF are you on about? Blake, Youhzny and Gonzalez ALL had good records against Nadal at the time Ancic's only win against Nadal came on carpet. LOL and not only that Rafa beat Ancic at WIM in 2003 when he was like barely 17 but somehow in 06 Ancic would've beaten him? You fail so bad hahahahahaha.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 )
I did not mention the AO at all in this instance, I was talking purely about the USO which he failed to win because he couldn't put it together like Nadal did. Sure he might've had the ability, but I didn't say he didn't, again you highlight your poor comprehension and reading skills. I said he was not good enough to win it and the history books agree with me

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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
And your response is with

a) excuse #1
b) excuse #2

Why did well past his prime Fed beat Djokovic at Wimbledon in 2012? That was in fact a year and a half later than their AO11 encounter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
he was sub-par by those standards in AO 2012 ...
Let me guess, because Nadal and Murray nearly beat him this time? Mustn't have had anything to do with the level Murray and Nadal played...

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 ....
But he couldn't WIN the US Open. What part of that do you not understand? His level was either not consistent enough to last the whole tournament OR he just didn't have the ability. Now you and I both agree he had the ability so it must be because he couldn't hold his high HC level of play long enough to win it. He failed, Nadal didn't; deal with it, that is the undisputable fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 ) ....
So what? He won both the USO and AO, please give me a link to the vision where Borg won the US Open. I'd like to see it.

I also like how you conveniently like to say Borg only had 4 tries to win the USO on HC well less chance to be dominated too then, you see it works both ways lol.

Also back then there weren't as many power hitters that could belt you off the court since the racquet technology wasn't there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
umm, no .....
Nice counter argument. I'm convinced now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
oh, he is pretty good off clay , no doubt , but he isn't better than borg off clay ...
Hogwash, Borg wouldn't have taken the #1 ranking off Federer. No way he was going to beat him in 3 major finals consecutively to take it away. I'd even make the case that Fed would've beaten Borg at RG at least once which would further reduce Borg's chances of taking the ranking away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abmk View Post
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 ....
He couldn't beat McEnroe at the USO, he had 2 attempts and although he did push him in one of the finals, he got beat convincingly in the other.

So, as promised, I will kindly point you to Borg's failed (HC) US Open attempts:

1978 LOST to Connors 6-4 6-2 6-2
1979 LOST to Tanner 6-2 4-6 6-2 7-6
1980 LOST to McEnroe 7-6 6-1 6-7 5-7 6-4
1981 LOST to McEnroe 4-6 6-2 6-4 6-3
The_Order is offline   Reply With Quote