How many Masters Shields will Rafael "the impossible" Nadal win?

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by ThoughtCrime

I personally think he will win 69 Master Shields , before retiring at age 60. 35 of those being Monte Carlo. I'm probably underestimating however.

You definitely are underestimating, in fact your mathematics is worse than even mine.

He already has 20, and he is 25/26 years old. So he has 49 to win, and 35 years to win them. That's just one or two a year. Shame on you.

Also he has 8 MC's, so he has 27 more to win. And 35 years. Even the most rabid hater would not agree that Rafa will let a single MC title slip by until he retires. That would suggest a serious decline. If he can't win MC in a given year, what hope has he to win anything else, esp a mandatory event.

You paint a bleak picture, my friend.

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by Numenor

Stop being such a Nadal hater. He will clearly win atleast a thousand Master shields, and that's by a low estimate. He will also win the Grand Slam several times over, end world hunger, find the cure to cancer and become the next king of Spain.

Let him first find a cure to Djokovic. Then we talk about other things.

[Numenor]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

Let him first find a cure to Djokovic. Then we talk about other things.

Senti, both you and I know that the 6-3/6-1 scoreline is a panacea.

[Feather]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

Let him first find a cure to Djokovic. Then we talk about other things.

He will find a cure. Rafa wants to lose to Novak continuosly for few more years and after that he will start winning

[Feather]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

You definitely are underestimating, in fact your mathematics is worse than even mine.

He already has 20, and he is 25/26 years old. So he has 49 to win, and 35 years to win them. That's just one or two a year. Shame on you.

Also he has 8 MC's, so he has 27 more to win. And 35 years. Even the most rabid hater would not agree that Rafa will let a single MC title slip by until he retires. That would suggest a serious decline. If he can't win MC in a given year, what hope has he to win anything else, esp a mandatory event.

You paint a bleak picture, my friend.

In those 35 years I assume he will win 35 RG titles also

[nadal_slam_king]

Nadal already found a cure for that one-year wonder named Djokovic. Nadal simply played Monte Carlo like 2010. Problem solved.

[Love all]

I hope recent MC masters would prove to be his last masters shield of his career. Nevertheless, he would end up with around 25 most probably.

[rascaypica]

Originally Posted by Mike Sams

Being close doesn't mean he won it though, last I checked.
And it doesn't mean he'll be any closer to winning it the next time either.

Yes, but being in finals, means that Nadal is a great HC player, not the best but among them. Is the same like saying Federer or Djoko dont play a **** in Clay... this statemente would wrong.

Nadal can get frw HC master yet... he is close to. In fact, he es now a days teh second best player in HC if you see his last two years results.

Finals in GS, seminfinals, and again finals in MS, and semifinals... Only beaten by Nole (who is the best right now)

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by nadal_slam_king

Nadal already found a cure for that one-year wonder named Djokovic. Nadal simply played Monte Carlo like 2010. Problem solved.

By calling Nole a one-year wonder you are admitting indirectly that Nadal had no answer for Nole in 2011. He had to wait for Nole to get off that "one-year wonder" in order to beat him. *sigh*

[nadal_slam_king]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

By calling Nole a one-year wonder you are admitting indirectly that Nadal had no answer for Nole in 2011. He had to wait for Nole to get off that "one-year wonder" in order to beat him. *sigh*

No, I'm admitting that Nadal 2010 is far superior to Nadal 2011. Nadal regaining his 2010 form (not uncommon, as he was great in 2008, slipped in 2009, and regained form in 2010) overshadows anything Djokovic can do. I'm calling Djokovic a 'one year wonder' because I know Nadal has regained top form, so 2012 won't be Djokovic's year.

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by nadal_slam_king

No, I'm admitting that Nadal 2010 is far superior to Nadal 2011. Nadal regaining his 2010 form (not uncommon, as he was great in 2008, slipped in 2009, and regained form in 2010) overshadows anything Djokovic can do. I'm calling Djokovic a 'one year wonder' because I know Nadal has regained top form, so 2012 won't be Djokovic's year.

But you do admit that Nole 2011 is superior to Nadal of any year. Come on, surely you can see that ?

[Feather]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

But you do admit that Nole 2011 is superior to Nadal of any year. Come on, surely you can see that ?

He will say Nadal 2010 is superior to nadal 2011, so obviously Novak won

[Mike Sams]

Originally Posted by nadal_slam_king

Nadal already found a cure for that one-year wonder named Djokovic. Nadal simply played Monte Carlo like 2010. Problem solved.

Your argument is nonsense because Djokovic has ALREADY WON a Grand Slam and a hardcourt Masters title in 2012!!!
So how can Djokovic be a one year wonder in 2011 when he is leading the points race in 2012 also? Stupid *******!

[Mike Sams]

Furthermore, Djokovic has just dropped out of the Serbia Open which shows that he doesn't care about tennis right now and has admitted he's not in the mood to play after his grandfather's death.
*******s will be disappointed once again in 2 weeks time when Djokovic is ready to roar!

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by Mustard

LOL
Don't be ridiculous. Monte Carlo is one of the biggest masters series tournaments of all and has a very long history. It also has stronger fields and more committed players than the Shanghai monstrosity gets, and to think they downgraded Hamburg for that. Disgusting.

I think Madrid being allowed to change from HC to clay and Tiriac's plotting have to take some of the blame for that. The ATP most of all, of course.

[nadal_slam_king]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

But you do admit that Nole 2011 is superior to Nadal of any year. Come on, surely you can see that ?

Admitting your opinion is something only you can do. Be grateful that you have an opinion.

[nadal_slam_king]

Originally Posted by Mike Sams

Your argument is nonsense because Djokovic has ALREADY WON a Grand Slam and a hardcourt Masters title in 2012!!!
So how can Djokovic be a one year wonder in 2011 when he is leading the points race in 2012 also? Stupid *******!

What happened in 2008? Djokovic won the AO, and then lost the year to Nadal.

What happened in 2010? Nadal lost the AO and won 3 straight slams.

What happened in 2009? Nadal won the AO but had his worst year ever.

See how the world works?

The fact Nadal took Djokovic to 5 sets and actually led 4-2 in the 5th set is an awful sign for Djokovic. It is clearly Djokovic's most successful slam, and Nadal's least successful.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Don't be ridiculous. Monte Carlo is one of the biggest masters series tournaments of all and has a very long history. It also has stronger fields and more committed players than the Shanghai monstrosity gets, and to think they downgraded Hamburg for that. Disgusting.

You're just saying that because Nadal won MC 8 times. I saw MC and I don't feel like it's in the level with IW and Miami, which have bigger draws plus even had women competing. Despite MC is a 1000, but it's an equivalent to ATP500 since players can replace it.

Shanghai problem is no fan showed up to watch. The tournament looks dead when you see nothing but empty seats.

[TopFH]

Originally Posted by nadal_slam_king

What happened in 2008? Djokovic won the AO, and then lost the year to Nadal.

What happened in 2010? Nadal lost the AO and won 3 straight slams.

What happened in 2009? Nadal won the AO but had his worst year ever.

See how the world works?

The fact Nadal took Djokovic to 5 sets and actually led 4-2 in the 5th set is an awful sign for Djokovic. It is clearly Djokovic's most successful slam, and Nadal's least successful.

Why don't you mention the 5-hour semi ND had with Murray before Nadal? Also, remember who won the AO? Coming close is no the same as winning, you blind fool.

[nadal_slam_king]

Originally Posted by TopFH

Why don't you mention the 5-hour semi ND had with Murray before Nadal? Also, remember who won the AO? Coming close is no the same as winning, you blind fool.

Nadal was on the court longer for Djokovic during the entire AO, so it evens out. Actually Nadal's semi-final vs Federer was extremely intense throughout, and a higher level of tennis than Murray-Djokovic. It was a lot closer than the 2011 Roland Garros final which people seem to think was a great match. Coming close is not the same as winning? Gee really? You think you made a discovery there? It's still coming close, rather than being thrashed, fool.