You're going to have to try and grow up and realise that people have different opinions than you about the game of tennis. Trying to dismiss everyone as a troll makes you look foolish.You're such a repetitive troll
How many times has he missed it? Once? And it doesn't expose the limits of his game, it exposes his age..
Exactly, and the game is so much more physical than it was before, 3 out of the top 4 play mainly rallying tennis, asking a 36 year old to go against a baseline rallier on a slow *** surface is difficult, no matter how talented the player is.
You think 11 clay court titles and one French open in 20 years as a professional tennis player is a good record -for someone of Federer's ability?
Oh boy. Is this fanboyism or religious zealotry?
It's very good, considering his ability on the other surfaces, since when is tennis only played on clay?
No. It's an objective observation.
He was 35 this French Open edition.
Oh sorry a 35 year old, my bad, a 1 year mistake, jeez some people man
You think winning 53/73 titles on clay, which is 30% of the calendar, is a great example of all-surface variety - for someone of Nadal's ability?
At least 2 Slams on each surface comments incoming.
Only morons would suggest Nadal has more variety than Federer.
Few important facts missing. How many clay tournaments were played by each? What's their winning percentage? What is their percentage of finals made? What is the breakdown of level of tournament? 250? 500? 1000? Slam?
You can try and twist things any way you wish to suit your agenda. The facts are clear: one clay victory every two years is not a strong record.
I thought we were dealing with facts. What is this twist thing you're on about?
Sometimes, you just have to admit the facts are against you and accept things the way they are. 11 clay titles in 20 years is an average to poor record for a player of Federer's ability. There really is no room for intelligent debate.
Facts aren't for or against anything. They're facts. They don't much care what anyone thinks. It's not the facts, it's the conclusion you're drawing.
the irony of a certain fanbase going on and on about missing slams when fed was like one of the record holders of most consistent gs slam appearances. they have some nerve tbh.
I hope thats the thing. To skip a major is terrible thing in my book unless you arent injured. I wouldnt be happy if Rafa withdraws from Wimbledon because he feels he has no chance anymore.
Why are you even bother answering to those stupidities?
hasn't rafa skipped multiple majors throughout his career, and they were all due to injuries? i honestly doubt that, also some could have been preventative. idk if you count that injury related b/c fed said that he didn't feel quite right on clay last year. terrible is such an exaggeration esp at this stage in fed's career. he's shown up every year at rg despite his chances being incredibly slim against rafa during his peak.
