Interesting Trivia and Nadal - Page 2

McEnroeisanartist · 12-05-2012, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clarky21

I always saw his bias, and knew why he was starting threads like this about Nadal. He's as transparent as a plate glass window.

Clarky, what is my bias? That I think Federer is the greatest player of all time and that Nadal is a great player, but as far achievements go, in my humble opinion, don't come close to Federer's. Okay, you got me.

McEnroeisanartist · 12-05-2012, 11:13 AM

Also, haven't I posted several threads about great achievements by Nadal, or Djokovic, or Murray.

Crisstti · 12-05-2012, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clarky21

I always saw his bias, and knew why he was starting threads like this about Nadal. He's as transparent as a plate glass window.

It's just fine to have some bias about these things, I guess we all do, but he's run out of actually interesting statistics and it's becoming increasingly evident the point of his threads...

Clarky21 · 12-05-2012, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Clarky, what is my bias? That I think Federer is the greatest player of all time and that Nadal is a great player, but as far achievements go, in my humble opinion, don't come close to Federer's. Okay, you got me.

Everyone knows what it is so I feel no need to explain it.

How about you actually create a thread about Nadal's stats that isn't a negative one? And how about you create a thread about Fed's stats that is not a postive one? I doubt you will ever do that.

Clarky21 · 12-05-2012, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crisstti

It's just fine to have some bias about these things, I guess we all do, but he's run out of actually interesting statistics and it's becoming increasingly evident the point of his threads...

Agreed.

10agreeds

McEnroeisanartist · 12-05-2012, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clarky21

Everyone knows what it is so I feel no need to explain it.

How about you actually create a thread about Nadal's stats that isn't a negative one? And how about you create a thread about Fed's stats that is not a postive one? I doubt you will ever do that.

I suppose I do have a bias, I am hard pressed to think of a meaningful positive statistic about Nadal that isn't equaled by Federer. Consecutive match wins on clay? Similarly, I am hard pressed to think of a Federer statistic that is a negative won. Most matches lost in one year after having a match point by a great player?

Clarky21 · 12-05-2012, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

I suppose I do have a bias, I am hard pressed to think of a meaningful positive statistic about Nadal that isn't equaled by Federer. Consecutive match wins on clay? Similarly, I am hard pressed to think of a Federer statistic that is a negative won. Most matches lost in one year after having a match point by a great player?

There are negatives for Fed too, even though he's GOAT. Nobody is perfect.

There are also positives for Nadal like winning MC 8 straight years, and winning RG a record breaking 7 times out of 8 tries. You only focus on the obscure negative junk that just pushes your agenda.

DropShotArtist · 12-05-2012, 12:15 PM

Keep up the good work OP, no need to kowtow to these Nadal fangirls.

RAFA2005RG · 12-05-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudeski

Even better, has a man ever lost to another man in 3 straight slam finals?

That just goes to show, even the most prime of Djokovics can't beat Nadal at Roland Garros. It has become more clear than ever that the loss to Soderling in 2009 RG was the result of Nadal's parents separating. Nadal has to go bonkers to lose at RG.

RAFA2005RG · 12-05-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Clarky, what is my bias? That I think Federer is the greatest player of all time and that Nadal is a great player, but as far achievements go, in my humble opinion, don't come close to Federer's. Okay, you got me.

Actually, in terms of achievements, Federer has never been close to Nadal at any of the slams. Nadal is 52-1 at Roland Garros (and that's about to get a whole lot better as clumsy young oafs like Raonic become the main challenge, rather than Prime Djokovic). Federer at Wimbledon is trash compared to this. Federer has lost in the QFs of Wimbledon twice in the last 3 years. Federer has lost in the First Round of Wimbledon 3 times! And at the Australian Open and US Open Federer has been horrendous compared to Nadal at Roland Garros. Federer can't even say he's the greatest of all-time at a slam. And Federer couldn't even win slams on clay, grass and hardcourt in a Calendar Year. Nobody ever has, apart from Nadal.

cork_screw · 12-05-2012, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

In other words, it looks very unlikely that Nadal will ever finish a season ranked in the top 2 again.

.

Just because it's a very unlikely act to accomplish doesn't mean that it's unlikely Nadal can accomplish it. Nadal is a very special player with very unique circumstances that forced him to miss half of the year.

Crisstti · 12-05-2012, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DropShotArtist

Keep up the good work OP, no need to kowtow to these Nadal fangirls.

Sure just keep up coming up some contrived criteria that could possibly make Nadal look bad. Why not.

kOaMaster · 12-05-2012, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAFA2005RG

Actually, in terms of achievements, Federer has never been close to Nadal at any of the slams. Nadal is 52-1 at Roland Garros (and that's about to get a whole lot better as clumsy young oafs like Raonic become the main challenge, rather than Prime Djokovic).

yes he has, in all but the FO he's been far better than nadal. nadal is the king of clay but how would this "overachieve" anything federer did in the rest of the four grand slam tournaments where he has done significantly more than nadal?

MichaelNadal · 12-05-2012, 05:22 PM

I think he can make the top 2 again. 1 is another story.

RAFA2005RG · 12-05-2012, 11:21 PM

March 2010: Nadal ranked number 4.
June 2010: Nadal ranked number 1.

The big jump this year will more likely come at the US Open, obviously.

adil1972 · 12-06-2012, 12:10 AM

how many consecutive years fed has finished in top 2 year end ranking

SQA333 · 12-06-2012, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adil1972

how many consecutive years fed has finished in top 2 year end ranking

8 years, 2003-2010. 10 consec. years and counting Fed has finished in the Top 3.

Nadal could only manage 7 years straight in the Top 3.

McEnroeisanartist · 12-06-2012, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SQA333

8 years, 2003-2010. 10 consec. years and counting Fed has finished in the Top 3.

Nadal could only manage 7 years straight in the Top 3.

8 consecutive years in the top 2 by Federer is unreal. I was thinking Nadal would tie this, if not break this, but obviously he could not keep up.

12-05-2012, 05:22 PM	#34
MichaelNadal G.O.A.T. Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Charlotte NC Posts: 14,040	I think he can make the top 2 again. 1 is another story. __________________ "Of course it's happening inside your head Harry... why should that mean that it's not real?"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode