Search results

What a crock of ****! Pete was "naturally" gifted if and only if his serve worked. For his serve to work, the surface had to aid him. Pete's "skill" vanishes when surfaces don't suit him (btw, nice try claiming it takes "skill" to hit winners, but not for running down more balls). Pete is...

Vs djoker 2011 uso

Not true - vs Fed Miami 2005

No, it's just a figment of your vivid imagination. The 32-seed system afforded easier 1st rounds, but made later rounds (read 2nd round onwards) more difficult (all relative to the 16-seed system). The theory about "dangerous floaters" seeded 17-32 is overblown, and invented to explain away the...

hey, how about you show your presence in the other epic fail thread that you created? People are asking for you .. :D

you thought wrong (as always). If you're so confident, feel free to report my "double" account with TMF.

I feel that's too much of a demand coming from an irrational anti-Fed fan..

LOL, I never have used the ignore list. You must have me confused with someone else. You CAN deny Pete the top server prize vis a vis Karlovic et. al. All things considered (surfaces, returners, strings, etc.), Pete is a slightly better server than Federer - no question about it. But Pete has...

I fail to see the relevance of your post in relation to the OP's.. Looks like OP touched a raw nerve - honestly, the only thing that looks silly is your retort.

O'RLY?? :D One aspect that's unmistakable to Pete worshippers such as Anaconda is that they talk from both sides of their mouth - they claim Pete is the greatest "true" grass court player (i.e. 90s grass, which was fast and skidding and rewarded first strike tennis), while ignoring the impact...

Sampras can talk all he wants - he does not have to walk the talk, does he? Frankly, of all the past greats, he comes across as the most bitter. He has mellowed down a bit, but he was insufferable around 2009.

So you admit pioline and Washington did not face a good s& v'er until the finals? This is a new low, even for you claiming that Pioline and Washington played more aggressive tennis than nadal. I'd like to see the nostalgia-philes explain away Pioline and Washington in Wimbledon finals, while...

Lol @ the morons claiming Nadal would be a dud on grass, when the 90s saw "giants" like Pioline and Washington in the Wimbledon finals. Did you clowns even watch Nadal in 2007 and 2008? He's in a slump, and I have no doubt he'll come out of it.

I agree with you (can't believe I'm hearing myself say that, lol). Looks like Pete is feeling left out of the GOAT club. Pete's problem was his lack of clay court game (movement on clay, patience, decent back hand, etc.), not his equipment.

IMO, Murray's 2nd serve (and terrible 1st serve %) did him in the Djoker match (like most of his matches).

Awesome post. That's too much to absorb, for someone who spells "mental" as "menthal" despite having pointed it out multiple times :)

WTF are you on about????:confused:

He's just being true to what he is...

Far more folks in India know about Mercedes or Rolex than Accenture. Thanks for playing.

oh, so you were just seeking attention? would've never guessed :twisted: Yeah, it's very hard for Federer to appear in the front pages of tabloids.. Tiger was more "marketable" than Federer.

It's an IT consulting company. Accenture had just then signed up Tiger (2009 or 2010, can't recall). Accenture was a fairly significant company in India. Ergo, Tiger was very popular in India (more popular than Federer, at least) -- this was the OP's "argument", or something very similar along...

Yeah, the OP lives in a bubble - in fact, one of his "arguments" for Tiger's popularity was that he was signed up by a global corporation Accenture -- apparently, that's proof that he was more popular than Federer. (waits for DiaRrhea-II to counter with some more meaningless name sake items)

you don't make much sense. You were wrong then, and you're fully wrong now - Federer was and is more popular than Tiger ever was, world-wide. Too much anal-ache that your golfer man-crush is no longer relevant? Masochist much? I wonder why else you would bump this thread...

Do you complain of unfairness when Nadal gets to play on show courts all the time, while Sock is mostly relegated to outside courts? Sock would be a fool to let go of the opportunity to take an extra few seconds between points, seeing that Nadal was doing it 100% of the time and getting away...

Your mask fell off. Just couldn't help yourself, could you :) ? If Nadal's FO stats are "unmatched", then Federer's stats at Wimbledon are unmatched (by Pete) too. Can't have it both ways...

He looked fine. Some are reading too much into it.

Irrational Nadal worshippers would. According to them, Nadal is a late sleeper, so his natural tendency is to wake up late, so it is understandable that he's late to school. He is a good student (straight A's every time), and that is all that matters. The rule to penalize because he's a few...

you're wrong. Federer will do better at faster courts. Nice try classifying Aus open as a "faster hard court", while making Wimbledon a slower court. Just because Pete relatively sucked during the tail end of his career does not mean that that was the norm - there are/were a lot of players who...

Federer is among the best players of all time under windy conditions. Remember Federer being Agassi in 5 sets in extremely windy conditions at the 2004 USO? Agassi was considered the GOAT under windy conditions, and Federer handled him.

See, you were able to develop a sense of time by just watching the match, with some practice. Why can't Nadal do the same - he's actually playing the match! In any case, I don't fully understand your position, and it feels we're discussing different aspects of this "incident". I'd like for...