How can Nadal be a GOAT candidate if... - Page 9

VPhuc tennis fan · 10-06-2012, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

That's what goat may mean to you and I respect it.

However that's not at all what it means to me and I ask you to respect that as well.

To me the greatest player that ever lived means that no one else could beat them. It's really simple.

Yes Federer is 31 today and its incredible . The man has not lost a step. He is as great as he ever was . In fact he says he is playing the best tennis of his life.

Furthermore , Federer at 31 is I'm far better shape than Nadal is at 26.

Nadal has in my opinion done far more in reality than Federer. Nadal has won more with less opportunies. He has won 11 slams but skipped I think 6 plus the Olympics.

By coincidence the number of slams Federer has is also 6 more than Nadal but at 31 he has never missed a slam an has had way more opportunities . Fed has even had more opportunities at the Olympics but never could win .

Add to that Nadal has beaten Fed in slams on grass and hard while Federer has not even come close to touching Nadal at the FO.

Yeah Fed has his 17 on paper but that's all he has over Nadal.....nothing else. Feds 17 slams mainly happened becaise he avoided Nadal.

This is the first time in history that the number one is dominated by his main rival......so you really can't use generalities like most slams becaise this situation is an exception to the general rule.

And it's a pretty glaring exception. Federer has been very fortunate in his career to avoid Nadal......very fortunate indeed.

Fed...avoid Nadal. Really? Back to the comparo that I asked. Where was Rafa when Fed won against Hewitt, Safin, and other supposedly weak players? Oh, I remember. Rafa skipped here, skipped there, injured here, injured there, still wore development diapers. Who was avoiding who?

merlinpinpin · 10-06-2012, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

He has always lost to Nadal....even when Nadal was a young developing player at 18 years old.

You should tray and learn:
- what "always" means
- what the results of tennis matches are

So, to recap, Nadal *has* always lost to Rosol, but Federer is far from having always lost to Nadal.

The Dark Knight · 10-06-2012, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VPhuc tennis fan

Fed...avoid Nadal. Really? Back to the comparo that I asked. Where was Rafa when Fed won against Hewitt, Safin, and other supposedly weak players? Oh, I remember. Rafa skipped here, skipped there, injured here, injured there, still wore development diapers. Who was avoiding who?

He avoided having to play Rafa for one reason or another through no fault of his own.

But the facts are the facts . He simply has been dominated by Rafa and his 17 slams came mainly by not having to deal with Rafa for one reason or another.

If you just want to add up the slams and declare that Fed is the goat then you are absolutely right.

However for me it's a far more complicated issue than simply adding up the numbers in a robotic fashion.

I just cannot logically call someone the greatest player that ever lived when he keeps losing to someone . It just defys logic .

The Dark Knight · 10-06-2012, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merlinpinpin

You should tray and learn:
- what "always" means
- what the results of tennis matches are

So, to recap, Nadal *has* always lost to Rosol, but Federer is far from having always lost to Nadal.

Nadal beat Federer in their very first meeting on a hardcourt . So yes Nadal has been beating Federer since their very first meeting ....for Nadals entire career he has always Dominated Federer. Yet somehow Federer is better than Nadal? How does that make sense?

Prisoner of Birth · 10-06-2012, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

He avoided having to play Rafa for one reason or another through no fault of his own.

But the facts are the facts . He simply has been dominated by Rafa and his 17 slams came mainly by not having to deal with Rafa for one reason or another.

If you just want to add up the slams and declare that Fed is the goat then you are absolutely right.

However for me it's a far more complicated issue than simply adding up the numbers in a robotic fashion.

I just cannot logically call someone the greatest player that ever lived when he keeps losing to someone . It just defys(sic) logic .

Yeah, I'm sure you do

Prisoner of Birth · 10-06-2012, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Nadal beat Federer in their very first meeting on a hardcourt . So yes Nadal has been beating Nadal since their very first meeting ....for Nadals entire career he has always Dominated Federer. Yet somehow Federer is better than Nadal? How does that make sense?

Ohhhh, right. When that "first meeting" happens, let me know.

VPhuc tennis fan · 10-06-2012, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merlinpinpin

You should tray and learn:
- what "always" means
- what the results of tennis matches are

So, to recap, Nadal *has* always lost to Rosol, but Federer is far from having always lost to Nadal.

Nah. Always = clay, clay clay clay ... to the infinity. Results= RG preferably. In no case, WTF or HC or grass. Too biaised,no?

Povl Carstensen · 10-06-2012, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

that's all he has over Nadal.....nothing else.

All Nadal has over Federer is more or less clay and his record 241 weeks at nr. 2.

merlinpinpin · 10-06-2012, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Nadal beat Federer in their very first meeting on a hardcourt . So yes Nadal has been beating Federer since their very first meeting ....for Nadals entire career he has always Dominated Federer. Yet somehow Federer is better than Nadal? How does that make sense?

It does when you understand how professional tennis works.

The Dark Knight · 10-06-2012, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VPhuc tennis fan

Nah. Always = clay, clay clay clay ... to the infinity. Results= RG preferably. In no case, WTF or HC or grass. Too biaised,no?

Except that's not true . Nadal beat him in the greatest match of all time on Feds best surface .....grass. Then at the AO which is hard court.

The Dark Knight · 10-06-2012, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merlinpinpin

It does when you understand how professional tennis works.

I guess I'm pretty simple . Someone beats me continually in finals then I think he is better than me.

The Dark Knight · 10-06-2012, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

All Nadal has over Federer is mnore or less clay and his record 241 weeks at nr. 2.

Nadal beat Fed on Nadals worst surfaces hardcourt and grass....by contrast Fed never even came close to beating Nadal on clay 6-1,-6-0 , 6-3.....

So Nadal is better all around.

VPhuc tennis fan · 10-06-2012, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

He avoided having to play Rafa for one reason or another through no fault of his own.

But the facts are the facts . He simply has been dominated by Rafa and his 17 slams came mainly by not having to deal with Rafa for one reason or another.

If you just want to add up the slams and declare that Fed is the goat then you are absolutely right.

However for me it's a far more complicated issue than simply adding up the numbers in a robotic fashion.

I just cannot logically call someone the greatest player that ever lived when he keeps losing to someone . It just defys logic .

He ( Fed) avoided... No, he didn't. He was in these GS finals.Where was Rafa? Funny how you understand the meaning of "avoid". FYI, it was RAfa. DO NOT twist things around to sui your purposes.

Prisoner of Birth · 10-06-2012, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Nadal beat Fed on Nadals worst surfaces hardcourt and grass....by contrast Fed never even came close to beating Nadal on clay 6-1,-6-0 , 6-3.....

So Nadal is better all around.

Federer bageled Nadal on Clay.

VPhuc tennis fan · 10-06-2012, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

I guess I'm pretty simple . Someone beats me continually in finals then I think he is better than me.

So Djoker must SO FAR AHEAD of Rafa based on his results in GS finals last year, right? What was it again, 3-0?

VPhuc tennis fan · 10-06-2012, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Nadal beat Fed on Nadals worst surfaces hardcourt and grass....by contrast Fed never even came close to beating Nadal on clay 6-1,-6-0 , 6-3.....

So Nadal is better all around.

Keep spinning. You'll understand one day.