View Single Post
Old 12-31-2012, 09:55 AM   #382
abmk
G.O.A.T.
 
abmk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: India
Posts: 14,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY View Post
Get the name straight, unless you are itching for a prime spot on the ban list. ..and if your respose to this is more flaming, then you have not learned anything about the first part of this reply.
I was just making the point that you blunder so many times ........ is it that hard to get ?

oh and I'm sooooooo scared about a ban for pointing out dumb posts and posting from someone ......


Quote:
Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY View Post
Consistently means nothing if the one time you win is when the master of the event is not there. That is too glaring to ignore, but continue thinking Federer's fluke FO had nothing to do with Nadal not being there, when we know the results when he faced Nadal in four FO finals.

Hint: Federer did not defeat Nadal, thus Federer's one FO victory was not inevitable, as we can assume--from the record--that he would have lost to the man who owned him at the FO.

Fluke.

.
in which part of my post did I say federer not facing nadal had nothing to do with it ?

since when is beating nadal @ RG a pre-requisite for a RG win not to be called a fluke ? face it, almost everyone , including laver would be defeated by prime nadal @ RG all those times ......

master of the event ???? LOL, what if there is a different champion for every year in a time-frame of 5 years for an event ? then who is the master ? so is every one of them a fluke ? LOL !!!!!! what if a player dominated an event and then retired ? the next winner would automatically be a fluke ? LOL !!!!

A fluke would be if a player was missing for most part, but only took advantage when the draw opened up big time ...... not the case here .....

and finally get a life : a calendar GS, while wonderful, isn't the only thing in tennis !

Last edited by abmk : 12-31-2012 at 09:58 AM.
abmk is offline   Reply With Quote