Nadal nervous about coming back!

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I think YOU should not insult our intelligence. The burden of proof is always on conspiracy theorists .

There is no burden of proof necessary, this is not a court of law, it is a tennis forum where people have different opinions.
 

Feather

Legend
There is no burden of proof necessary, this is not a court of law, it is a tennis forum where people have different opinions.

I really don't think Rafa is banned. I think it's impossible to happen. I suspect Djokovic more of using any banned substance than Rafa. I don't intend to say that you meant Rafa was banned. Just added my two cents
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I really don't think Rafa is banned. I think it's impossible to happen. I suspect Djokovic more of using any banned substance than Rafa. I don't intend to say that you meant Rafa was banned. Just added my two cents

That is where we disagree. Also, I am not trying to say Nadal may use something and the other top players don't. I don't think that at all.
 

Crisstti

Legend
How did he do that? Did he beat Djokovic off clay since 2011? He has NOT shown that he can yet. I think he can, but he certainly has not shown it yet.

I thought what I said was pretty clear. He showed he can at the AO (let's for a moment forget all the times that he's beat him before on hc). It doesn't mean he's done it.

Let me remind the children in this thread that a doping ban is a lot longer than 6 months. Even recreational drugs is a 2 year ban. When Hingis was banned for cocaine her reading was just 42ng/ml of a cocaine metabolite (such a minute trace that it wouldn't trigger a positive result had a test been administered by the US Military), and that legend was give 2 YEARS just for using a recreational drug. Doping is far more serious. That means once Nadal returns (this month) you kids are going to owe him (and everyone else) an engraved apology.
mh1.jpg

Martina looks gorgeous there...
 

Crisstti

Legend
You run the ATP do you? ;)

Nobody actually knows the inner business of the ATP and what they would do or would not do for their biggest star players so please don't insult our intelligence. As has been mentioned many times before a top player could be on a provisional suspension and the public would not find out about it if said player was cleared in a tribunal.

Except for you, of course.

There is no burden of proof necessary, this is not a court of law, it is a tennis forum where people have different opinions.

And where people can call your on bs accusations for what they are.
 
Last edited:

Clarky21

Banned
How did he do that? Did he beat Djokovic off clay since 2011? He has NOT shown that he can yet. I think he can, but he certainly has not shown it yet.


Eeyore hasn't shown he can consistently beat Nadal off of hardcourts. That street travels both ways.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I thought what I said was pretty clear. He showed he can at the AO (let's for a moment forget all the times that he's beat him before on hc). It doesn't mean he's done it.

Excuse me, did Nadal actually win the AO in 2012? Did I miss that? ;)
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Except for you, of course.



And were people can call your on bs accusations for what they are.

I don't know the inner workings of the ATP but I do know a lot about business.

I assume you mean where and not were. ;) You can call me out on my bs accusations all you want, doesn't change my opinion which last time I checked was my democratic right and this is a tennis forum not a court of law so you are wasting your time.

Remember nobody thought Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones or countless other pro athletes had anything to do with doping. LOL, what a joke.
 

tacou

G.O.A.T.
Tennistically hah. I like this. He's basically saying I'mma play AO and then nothing until IW/Miami. That's what he should have been doing his whole career.
 

kragster

Hall of Fame
I don't know the inner workings of the ATP but I do know a lot about business.

I assume you mean where and not were. ;) You can call me out on my bs accusations all you want, doesn't change my opinion which last time I checked was my democratic right and this is a tennis forum not a court of law so you are wasting your time.

Remember nobody thought Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones or countless other pro athletes had anything to do with doping. LOL, what a joke.

I don't know what rock you were living under but right since 1999 or 2000 there have been serious allegations against Armstrong! It might have taken them a while to prove it conclusively but the news has been in the media for ages. Just do a google search for it. Now contrast that to what's in the media about Nadal. Basically nothing except some idle TW talk and yannick Noah making some random comment. Let me know when there is a serious allegation against Nadal and then we can have a reasonable discussion.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know what rock you were living under but right since 1999 or 2000 there have been serious allegations against Armstrong! It might have taken them a while to prove it conclusively but the news has been in the media for ages. Just do a google search for it. Now contrast that to what's in the media about Nadal. Basically nothing except some idle TW talk and yannick Noah making some random comment. Let me know when there is a serious allegation against Nadal and then we can have a reasonable discussion.

I should have said many people still did not think Armstrong was guilty of anything despite all of the rumors. Heck many people now still don't think Armstrong is guilty of anything.

There are many rumors about Nadal that have been around for many years just as there were about Armstrong, you just don't want to see it. There were the exact same type of rumors surrounding Armstrong as there are about Nadal, I don't see a lot of difference between the two cases. Nothing could be proven with Armstrong until they decided to investigate him closely and go after him but there was tons of circumstantial evidence. In any case, I don't want to argue with you, we obviously have different views on the subject. But let me state again for the record, I think most of the elite players probably use something (PED) so I am on no specific witch hunt, it is just that the rumors about Nadal have been the loudest.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
I should have said many people still did not think Armstrong was guilty of anything despite all of the rumors. Heck many people now still don't think Armstrong is guilty of anything.

You speak with surprise about those people who believe that Armstrong has not really been proved guilty, when what's really a surprise are people's willingness to believe a process that involves plea bargained cyclists and people with axes to grind. Armstrong got punished like he has because he refused to plea bargain when faced with threats and circumstantial evidence/plea bargained witnesses, based on no objective, physical evidence. That is a fact.
 
You speak with surprise about those people who believe that Armstrong has not really been proved guilty, when what's really a surprise are people's willingness to believe a process that involves plea bargained cyclists and people with axes to grind. Armstrong got punished like he has because he refused to plea bargain when faced with threats and circumstantial evidence/plea bargained witnesses, based on no objective, physical evidence. That is a fact.

You have a lot of reading to do.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
You speak with surprise about those people who believe that Armstrong has not really been proved guilty, when what's really a surprise are people's willingness to believe a process that involves plea bargained cyclists and people with axes to grind. Armstrong got punished like he has because he refused to plea bargain when faced with threats and circumstantial evidence/plea bargained witnesses, based on no objective, physical evidence. That is a fact.

Refused to plea bargain? The guy did not proceed forward because he knew he was guilty as hell and going on in the process would only embarrass him further. They have everything but the kitchen sink as evidence against him. Please Mustard, don't be so ignorant. You are WRONG here. They would not strip an innocent guy of his medals. Please educate yourself on this subject. :oops:
 

Crisstti

Legend
I should have said many people still did not think Armstrong was guilty of anything despite all of the rumors. Heck many people now still don't think Armstrong is guilty of anything.

There are many rumors about Nadal that have been around for many years just as there were about Armstrong, you just don't want to see it. There were the exact same type of rumors surrounding Armstrong as there are about Nadal, I don't see a lot of difference between the two cases. Nothing could be proven with Armstrong until they decided to investigate him closely and go after him but there was tons of circumstantial evidence. In any case, I don't want to argue with you, we obviously have different views on the subject. But let me state again for the record, I think most of the elite players probably use something (PED) so I am on no specific witch hunt, it is just that the rumors about Nadal have been the loudest.

Yeah, haters are always the loudest kind of people.

There's no circumstantial evidence against Nadal (no, being out injured is no circumstantial evidence of anything).
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, haters are always the loudest kind of people.

There's no circumstantial evidence against Nadal (no, being out injured is no circumstantial evidence of anything).

Yes, there is circumstantial evidence and I am no hater of Nadal. I defend Nadal a lot on this forum. Learn to read posts.
 

Crisstti

Legend
Excuse me, did Nadal actually win the AO in 2012? Did I miss that? ;)

OK, this is too hard for you to get...

He didn't need to win to show he can. Like he showed he could beat Fed in Wimbledon in 2007. And like Fed and Djokovic haven't showed against Nadal on RG.

I don't know the inner workings of the ATP but I do know a lot about business.

I assume you mean where and not were. ;) You can call me out on my bs accusations all you want, doesn't change my opinion which last time I checked was my democratic right and this is a tennis forum not a court of law so you are wasting your time.

Remember nobody thought Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones or countless other pro athletes had anything to do with doping. LOL, what a joke.

Nope, defamation isn't a constitutional right.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Refused to plea bargain? The guy did not proceed forward because he knew he was guilty as hell and going on in the process would only embarrass him further.

It would have cost a lot of money on defence lawyers, not to mention all the stress it would have continued to cause, ad infinitum, over a cyclist who never tested positive according to the rules of cycling. It is an undeniable fact that Armstrong was stripped of all of his post-1998 titles because he refused any plea bargain, so they preceeded with the maximum penalty. This should make the whole process unsafe, as it's clearly open to corruption. Still, considering that the US justice system operates on this plea bargaining basis, giving the prosecution the powers of judge, jury and executioner, I shouldn't be surprised.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Crisstti;7076415]OK, this is too hard for you to get...

He didn't need to win to show he can. Like he showed he could beat Fed in Wimbledon in 2007. And like Fed and Djokovic haven't showed against Nadal on RG.

????? The only way a person shows he can win is if he does win. Nobody cares if he came close at W in 2007 and close at the AO in 2012. The fact is he has not won a title off clay since 2010, the rest if BS.



Nope, defamation isn't a constitutional right.

This does not constitute defamation and you are trying to pass yourself off as a lawyer yet? You took some pre-law courses that does not make you a lawyer, you need to go to law school for three years and pass the bar to be a lawyer, did you do that. Obviously not. ;)
 

Crisstti

Legend
????? The only way a person shows he can win is if he does win. Nobody cares if he came close at W in 2007 and close at the AO in 2012. The fact is he has not won a title off clay since 2010, the rest if BS.





This does not constitute defamation and you are trying to pass yourself off as a lawyer yet? You took some pre-law courses that does not make you a lawyer, you need to go to law school for three years and pass the bar to be a lawyer, did you do that. Obviously not. ;)

Yes it does.

I went to law school for 5 year, but I haven't passed the bar yet, which is why I'm not yet a lawyer. I've explained this before, but apparently your reading skills are lacking.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes it does.

I went to law school for 5 year, but I haven't passed the bar yet, which is why I'm not yet a lawyer. I've explained this before, but apparently your reading skills are lacking.

5 years? Where do you have to go to law school for 5 years? In my country it is 3 years, then you have to work for a law firm for a year (called articling), then you have to write the bar. Then, you are a lawyer.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Yep. Nadal has won bigger events on hc against Djokovic than the other way around on clay.

Yes at this point in time:

Nadal on clay >>>>> Djokovic on hard courts
Nadal on grass >>>>> Djokovic on grass
Nadal on hard courts >>>>> Djokovic on clay

Not right now probably, but in overall career terms that is where it stands now. Djokovic has a long way to go to even reach Nadal's level. Heck before 2011 Nadal was much more accomplished and overall better than Djokovic on hard courts even, with Djokovic probably not passing him until the end of 2011. As for Nadal needing to prove he can beat Djokovic off clay, he has already done it many times in big matches, U.S Open final, Olympic semis, Wimbledon semis, so regardless what happens from here he doesnt have to prove a thing vs Djokovic. It is Djokovic who took until he was 24 and had shared over 4 years in the Worlds top 3 with Nadal before he could beat him a single big match anywhere, even on hard courts, lol! Djokovic is the only one with one thing to prove, that he can beat Nadal at RG, something that Federer failed to do, but I think Djokovic will succeed where Federer always failed at some point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
Yes at this point in time:

Nadal on clay >>>>> Djokovic on hard courts
Nadal on grass >>>>> Djokovic on grass
Nadal on hard courts >>>>> Djokovic on clay

Not right now probably, but in overall career terms that is where it stands now. Djokovic has a long way to go to even reach Nadal's level. Heck before 2011 Nadal was much more accomplished and overall better than Djokovic on hard courts even, with Djokovic probably not passing him until the end of 2011. As for Nadal needing to prove he can beat Djokovic off clay, he has already done it many times in big matches, U.S Open final, Olympic semis, Wimbledon semis, so regardless what happens from here he doesnt have to prove a thing vs Djokovic. It is Djokovic who took until he was 24 and had shared over 4 years in the Worlds top 3 with Nadal before he could beat him a single big match anywhere, even on hard courts, lol! Djokovic is the only one with one thing to prove, that he can beat Nadal at RG, something that Federer failed to do, but I think Djokovic will succeed where Federer always failed at some point.

Why does Djokovic need to prove anything? Do you even know who the world #1 is right now? :lol:
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Why does Djokovic need to prove anything? Do you even know who the world #1 is right now? :lol:

Yes he is number 1 right now, yet there is at thread ongoing right now where it seems most posters dont even think he is an all time great (eg top 30 all time, and I actually argued I did think he was a bottom end 5th tier all time great, but most disagreed with me and even called me a ********* for arguing he was), while Federer and Nadal are firmly established as top 5 players all time. So in terms of his career and place in the grand scheme of the game, he still has a long way to go to make any sort of legacy for himself.
 

RAFA2005RG

Banned
Djokovic has a lot to prove at the slams, as of the 4 slam champions in 2012 Djokovic struggled to win his the most by far. That's if you value slams of course. And that US Open final vs Murray was the lowest quality slam final of 2012, by far. Mentally it looks like Djokovic has a problem in the big matches of late (Roland Garros final he had a lead in the 4th set, Wimbledon semi has a mess, US Open final 6-2 loss in the 5th set). And he's gone downhill the last 2 years at the Australian Open, from winning in straight sets in 2011 to almost giving the match away vs Nadal in 2012 after being in cruise control in the 4th set (and in the semi he wasn't convincing vs Murray either). 2011 must have been too much for Djokovic, physically, mentally or both. He can no longer finish off slams.
 
Last edited:

Crisstti

Legend
Yes, there is circumstantial evidence and I am no hater of Nadal. I defend Nadal a lot on this forum. Learn to read posts.

No, there isn't.

And no, you're not a Nadal hater, but these kind of thing usually comes from them. You're a special case ;).

5 years? Where do you have to go to law school for 5 years? In my country it is 3 years, then you have to work for a law firm for a year (called articling), then you have to write the bar. Then, you are a lawyer.

Only in this ****ty country apparently. It's five years for everything, except medicine where it's 8 years. There has been talk lately about it being too long. It's probably so that students get into more debt.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
No, there isn't.

And no, you're not a Nadal hater, but these kind of thing usually comes from them. You're a special case ;).



Only in this ****ty country apparently. It's five years for everything, except medicine where it's 8 years. There has been talk lately about it being too long. It's probably so that students get into more debt.

Oh ok, so it is five years for everything from beginning to end and not five years of school plus writing the bar? What about working for a firm for a year before you write the bar, don't they do that there?

Here it is three years of school plus a year of working in a law firm and then writing the bar, so five years total is about how long the whole process takes. That is long enough.
 

Crisstti

Legend
Oh ok, so it is five years for everything from beginning to end and not five years of school plus writing the bar? What about working for a firm for a year before you write the bar, don't they do that there?

Here it is three years of school plus a year of working in a law firm and then writing the bar, so five years total is about how long the whole process takes. That is long enough.

No, it's five years of school, plus then working not for a law firm but for the state, for 6-8 moonths and the bar.
 

tusharlovesrafa

Hall of Fame
No, it's five years of school, plus then working not for a law firm but for the state, for 6-8 moonths and the bar.

In India too,LLB(law course) is of 3 years,and then you got be become an Article under another Lawyer..Any ways I never thought Chile's education system is so messed up..:-?
 

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic has a lot to prove at the slams, as of the 4 slam champions in 2012 Djokovic struggled to win his the most by far. That's if you value slams of course. And that US Open final vs Murray was the lowest quality slam final of 2012, by far. Mentally it looks like Djokovic has a problem in the big matches of late (Roland Garros final he had a lead in the 4th set, Wimbledon semi has a mess, US Open final 6-2 loss in the 5th set). And he's gone downhill the last 2 years at the Australian Open, from winning in straight sets in 2011 to almost giving the match away vs Nadal in 2012 after being in cruise control in the 4th set (and in the semi he wasn't convincing vs Murray either). 2011 must have been too much for Djokovic, physically, mentally or both. He can no longer finish off slams.

Let's see how the top 4 fared at the slams this year :

Djok : W F SF F
Fed : SF SF W QF
Muzz: F QF F W
Nadal: F W R2 -


So yeah, looking at the above results, it is Djoker who has a lot to prove at the slams :lol: How close the match was, quality of the opponents and draw etc is just discussion material for internet tennis enthusiasts, but what counts in the real world is the end result, plain and simple.
 
Last edited:

Feather

Legend
Only in this ****ty country apparently. It's five years for everything, except medicine where it's 8 years. There has been talk lately about it being too long. It's probably so that students get into more debt.

Eight years for Medicine, that's too long. In my country it is 5.5 years, 4.5 years course plus one year internship. I wonder how long it is for Engineering, just curios as I am myself a software engineer by profession. It's four years here.

I have seen videos in youtube about the dangerous road in Chile, La Paz to Coroico. That's all I know about Chile plus few sportspersons
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Let's see how the top 4 fared at the slams this year :

Djok : W F SF F
Fed : SF SF W QF
Muzz: F QF F W
Nadal: F W R2 -


So yeah, looking at the above results, it is Djoker who has a lot to prove at the slams :lol: How close the match was, quality of the opponents and draw etc is just discussion material for internet tennis enthusiasts, but what counts in the real world is the end result, plain and simple.

Very true.
 

RAFA2005RG

Banned
Let's see how the top 4 fared at the slams this year :

Djok : W F SF F
Fed : SF SF W QF
Muzz: F QF F W
Nadal: F W R2 -


So yeah, looking at the above results, it is Djoker who has a lot to prove at the slams :lol: How close the match was, quality of the opponents and draw etc is just discussion material for internet tennis enthusiasts, but what counts in the real world is the end result, plain and simple.

Djokovic lost 3 of the 4 BIGGEST matches of the year. He lost Roland Garros final (by far the biggest match of Djokovic's career to this point, as it represented The Djokovic Slam and The Career Grand Slam), he lost Wimbledon Semi-final vs Federer, and he lost the US Open Final. This represents an inability to convert in the clutch. Whatever he had going for him mentally in 2011, is clearly gone. Nadal whereas, has become mentally stronger since losing the 2012 Australian Open. Nadal has never faced more pressure in his life than the 2012 Roland Garros Final.
 

Crisstti

Legend
Eight years for Medicine, that's too long. In my country it is 5.5 years, 4.5 years course plus one year internship. I wonder how long it is for Engineering, just curios as I am myself a software engineer by profession. It's four years here.

I have seen videos in youtube about the dangerous road in Chile, La Paz to Coroico. That's all I know about Chile plus few sportspersons

Engineering is 5 years too.
 

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic lost 3 of the 4 BIGGEST matches of the year. He lost Roland Garros final (by far the biggest match of Djokovic's career to this point, as it represented The Djokovic Slam and The Career Grand Slam), he lost Wimbledon Semi-final vs Federer, and he lost the US Open Final. This represents an inability to convert in the clutch. Whatever he had going for him mentally in 2011, is clearly gone. Nadal whereas, has become mentally stronger since losing the 2012 Australian Open. Nadal has never faced more pressure in his life than the 2012 Roland Garros Final.

Nadal became mentally stronger since losing the 2012 AO which is why he got broken immediately in the crucial 5th set of the 2nd round of Wimbledon by a #100 ranked player. So much for clutch! :lol:
 

Gonzo_style

Hall of Fame
Djokovic lost 3 of the 4 BIGGEST matches of the year. He lost Roland Garros final (by far the biggest match of Djokovic's career to this point, as it represented The Djokovic Slam and The Career Grand Slam), he lost Wimbledon Semi-final vs Federer, and he lost the US Open Final. This represents an inability to convert in the clutch. Whatever he had going for him mentally in 2011, is clearly gone. Nadal whereas, has become mentally stronger since losing the 2012 Australian Open. Nadal has never faced more pressure in his life than the 2012 Roland Garros Final.

Can you imagine what kind of pressure will be on Nadal when he plays against Rosol next time?
 

Clarky21

Banned
Let's see how the top 4 fared at the slams this year :

Djok : W F SF F
Fed : SF SF W QF
Muzz: F QF F W
Nadal: F W R2 -


So yeah, looking at the above results, it is Djoker who has a lot to prove at the slams :lol: How close the match was, quality of the opponents and draw etc is just discussion material for internet tennis enthusiasts, but what counts in the real world is the end result, plain and simple.


How about before 2011? Since your memory seems to be lacking quite a bit, figure up Eeyore's slams performances pre-Dr. Igor, and then maybe you will have a point.
 

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
How about before 2011? Since your memory seems to be lacking quite a bit, figure up Eeyore's slams performances pre-Dr. Igor, and then maybe you will have a point.

I was responding to a post talking about who struggled the most to win a slam in 2012.
Learn to read properly Clarky.
 

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic lost 3 of the 4 BIGGEST matches of the year. He lost Roland Garros final (by far the biggest match of Djokovic's career to this point, as it represented The Djokovic Slam and The Career Grand Slam), he lost Wimbledon Semi-final vs Federer, and he lost the US Open Final. This represents an inability to convert in the clutch. Whatever he had going for him mentally in 2011, is clearly gone. Nadal whereas, has become mentally stronger since losing the 2012 Australian Open. Nadal has never faced more pressure in his life than the 2012 Roland Garros Final.

I wish Nadal had used all his post AO '12 mental prowess to play the post Wimby season. I really do :-|
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic lost 3 of the 4 BIGGEST matches of the year. He lost Roland Garros final (by far the biggest match of Djokovic's career to this point, as it represented The Djokovic Slam and The Career Grand Slam), he lost Wimbledon Semi-final vs Federer, and he lost the US Open Final. This represents an inability to convert in the clutch. Whatever he had going for him mentally in 2011, is clearly gone. Nadal whereas, has become mentally stronger since losing the 2012 Australian Open. Nadal has never faced more pressure in his life than the 2012 Roland Garros Final.

You're ridiculous. You're punishing Djokovic for not being perfect. He was almost perfect in 2011, did you really expect him to replicate it in 2012?
 
Top