MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Now yer just fibb’in. [emoji16]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't recall having drinx in Hawaii last week
Now yer just fibb’in. [emoji16]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nadal fans have gone full blown kindergarten.
I'd say that you are just a miserable human being.I'd say that all of you are completely idiotic. It happens like clockwork every single year right before the French Open ends and continues right through Federer losing Wimbledon.
I don't recall having drinx in Hawaii last week
So... Novak's lucky in that respect.50% of Slams are on hardcourt. 25% are on clay. When you get 18 Slams it's an incredible achievement any way you look at but your comparison is apples to oranges.
So... Novak's lucky in that respect.
You even saved his time doing the math.Hard courts = 2/4 Slams, 6/9 Masters, 1/1 WTF, that's 9/13 = 70%
What is so weird about someone having 70% wins on HC (or even more)? Please explain, Parera. Kill all logic for us.
I don’t either...they were that strong [emoji16]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Federer problem is he has never been YE!, wont the US Open or French Open (beating Nadal) in the Nadal era, hence Federer about 6th of all time.Agreed Djokovic resume not balanced enough to put him ahead of Federer and is why federer is clearly better. Glad you agree too. Could have just ended the thread there really. And what contradictions of fed fans are you referring to? It is agreed feds all time records on HC (most slams currently) + grass (most slams currently) + clay are better. You agree too? Good
You also seem to be confused. Nadal's clay skew is irrelvant as he doesn't even have the records (even with the clay skew) for slams, WTF, has M1000 but not for long, olympics (murray), h2h (djokovic is best h2h player), weeks no 1, ye no 1 etc etc etc. He will finish with none of these records so the clay skew between federer and nadal is irrelevant. The clay skew may have some relevance for djokovic vs nadal as djokovic may finish a slam or two behind nadal (may not too) but for federer nadal clay skew is not even releavnt as nadal holds no records
You think Roddick and hewitt were better on clay than Thiem………..When did Wawrinka first win a slam? 2014. He wasnt even a factor for most of Nadal's RG wins.
Thiem is the same. Besides Thiem is not even at the level of A Safin/Nalbandian/Roddick/Hewitt on hard and grass but those guys are supposed to be weak players.
In the early years of Nadal's wins all he had was Federer, who I keep hearing from posters like you was not even that good even on his BEST surfaces, so why is he all of a sudden a great opponent on his worst surface?
Djokovic is a good clay player but he's better on HC, and fed has had to play Djokovic a load on HC.
The point is the competition has been stronger on HC than clay for the entire time Nadal and Fed have been winning slams. If 03 to 07 was weak, it was weakest on clay
Nadal and Federer. They may have been out of form at the time, that's not Djokovic's problem. They were still able to win Majors as was proven the next few years.Who did Djokovic have from 2014-2016? Which peak ATG?
I love both and AO is better run, but sponsor wise and prestige wise for players USO still bigger.True, but USO is the slowest after clay. He was doing fine till they slowed it down. Plus I would not say USO is bigger than AO.
Nadal and Djokovic were there from 2005 and 2007. Not Federer’s problem if they weren’t as good as him across all surfaces from 05-09.Nadal and Federer. They may have been out of form at the time, that's not Djokovic's problem. They were still able to win Majors as was proven the next few years.
Your arguments make no sense..according to you every Federer defeat doesn't count as he had a bad day!!
Nadal and Djokovic were there from 2005 and 2007. Not Federer’s problem if they weren’t as good as him across all surfaces from 05-09.
Federer was a grandpa in 14-16 and Nadal was an invalid from 2014 Wimbledon.They were children!!
Hard courts = 2/4 Slams, 6/9 Masters, 1/1 WTF, that's 9/13 = 70%
What is so weird about someone having 70% wins on HC (or even more)? Please explain, Parera. Kill all logic for us.
Nadal fans have gone full blown kindergarten.
You think Roddick and hewitt were better on clay than Thiem………..
Federer has done nothing at the biggest HC major since nadal and Djokovic peaked so your argument fails there.
Federer problem is he has never been YE!, wont the US Open or French Open (beating Nadal) in the Nadal era, hence Federer about 6th of all time.
Nadal has a winning h2h v Djokovic at the majors and multiple slams on all surfaces...….And Ned never beat Djokovic at AO or in multiple other events while Djokovic beat Ned literally every slam, wtf, masters they played and has a winning h2h and crushed him 7-0 7-0
clay competition has been far harder than what Federer had 2003-2006. For goodness sake....Phillipousis and Baghdatis lol.I said Roddick and Hewitt are as good on HC and Grass as Thiem is on clay. Thiem is good but lol at him being elevated to some sort of great, if he were playing back in 03-07 he'd be considered another weak era player.
Yep and Nadal never did anything at the biggest HC major when Fed was still peak
Anyway my point is, clay competition has been weaker than HC all of Fed and Nadal's career, that much is obvious
Federer made the final of Wimbledon, there are no excuses. He lost to the better player.Federer was a grandpa in 14-16 and Nadal was an invalid from 2014 Wimbledon.
clay competition has been far harder than what Federer had 2003-2006. For goodness sake....Phillipousis and Baghdatis lol.
Thiem, Wawrinka, Federer, Djokovic...….according to Federer fans that is otherwise if not then Federer and Djokovic cannot be complete players can they?No it hasn't been harder. Nadal won 2 slams in the time period you mention, who was so great on clay? Who did Nadal beat in the 2005 final again? Some drugs cheat who never achieved anything in his career. Who are these great clay players Nadal had to face?
Thiem, Wawrinka, Federer, Djokovic...….according to Federer fans that is otherwise if not then Federer and Djokovic cannot be complete players can they?
So you accept Nadal is GOAT as nadal has won multiple times on all surfaces against every opponent who is an ATG.Lol, you talk about Federer having a weak era. Nadal won a slam in 2005 less than 2 years after Federer won his first slam. But you mention Wawrinka who didnt win a slam until nearly 9 years after Nadal first won RG hahah. Stan didnt even meet Nadal at RG until 2013. Thiem has been around for 5 minutes a d has still not won even a masters on clay. These 2 have not been clay competition for most of Nadal's career.
So who did Nadal have? Djokovic? Ok, but Fed had Djokovic as well and Djokovic is a far harder player on HC and grass than clay - hence he's harder HC competition than clay. Fed played him more times in hc slams and wombledon than Nadal played him at RG
Federer, well according to posters like you Fed is not even as good as Nadal on HC, so how can he be competition on clay?
Let's face it, draw up a list of all the best players fro 2003 to now and the vast majority are tougher players on hc or grass
you are comparing one of the 5 greatest players in the open era with one who has won a single masters.....simply put, that is what you are doing. it is quite a stretchFederer was there in 2012-2015 as well, he was just not good enough to stop Djokovic at Wimbledon (2014, 2015) or Nadal at the Australian Open (2012, 2014).
A 33 years old Federer did not stop Djokovic in the Wimbledon 2014 final. A 33 years old Nadal stopped Thiem in the RG final. It basically refutes the age argument: if you are clearly better than another player, you should still defeat him at age 33.
Thiem is extremelly good on clay, he would have already won 3 RG titles and become an all-time great on clay if not for Nadal. In effect, Thiem would have won RG 2017, 2018 and 2019 if not for Nadal and would be in the Kuerten/Lendl tier on clay. If Nadal keeps stopping Thiem the next 3-4 years at RG, Thiem would have won 6 RG without Nadal, and would be disputing Borg the second place in the clay GOAT list if not for Nadal.
P. S.: I am not comparing Djokovic overall with Thiem, I am comparing Thiem on clay with Djokovic on grass. If not for Nadal, Thiem on clay could tie or even surpass Djokovic's grass achievements, but Nadal will stop him. On the other hand, Federer did not stop Djokovic at Wimbledon, and he should have, as he is the King of grass.
Nadal made final of Wimbledon 2006. Djokovic made final of USO 2007. There are no excuses. They lost to the better player.Federer made the final of Wimbledon, there are no excuses. He lost to the better player.
So you accept Nadal is GOAT as nadal has won multiple times on all surfaces against every opponent who is an ATG.
outside of Australia it is Nadal 9-4 Djokovic. Major count for 2 guys the same age is 18-15 Nadal...Nadal more Masters 1000...……..he never beat djokovic at AO GOAT hahahaha and has a losing h2h vs his main rival!!! and wait for it was humilated 7-0 7-0 by his main rival while peak!!
Nadal and Djokovic have exactly same proportion of Majors on their best surface..0.66666Not true!
Nadal is the most specialized (= surface dependent) of the big 3.
% of tier 1 events (slams, WTF, masters) won on each surface:
Federer = 54 titles overall : 33 on outdoor hard (61.1%), 8 on grass (14.8%), 7 on clay (13%), 6 on indoor hard (11.1%)
Djokovic = 53 titles overall: 30 on outdoor hard (56.6%), 10 on clay (18.9%), 9 on indoor hard (17%), 4 on grass (7.5%)
Nadal = 52 titles overall: 37 on clay (71.2%), 12 on outdoor hard (23.1%), 2 on grass (3.8%), 1 on indoor hard (1.9%)
Djoko is the most neutral in terms of surface and Nadal the least. It's even more striking when you consider the % of tier 1 played on each surface/environment: 50% on outdoor hard, 28.6% on clay, 14.3% on indoor hard and 7.1% on grass. Djoko is the only one of the 3 whose % follows the % of events played on each surface. Fed has a strong slant toward grass (14.8% titles vs 7.1% events played on the surface) and Nadal an even bigger slant toward clay (71.2% titles vs 28.6% events played on clay).
They were teenagers and not even fully grown..Federer was peak when he got owned by nadal and Djokovic at Wimbledon. He is the third wheel of this era. sorry.Nadal made final of Wimbledon 2006. Djokovic made final of USO 2007. There are no excuses. They lost to the better player.
Lol 3rd wheel of 2003-2012 era when he won 17 slams most time at number 1, most consecutive weeks, 5 in a row Wimbledon USO etc LOL.They were teenagers and not even fully grown..Federer was peak when he got owned by nadal and Djokovic at Wimbledon. He is the third wheel of this era. sorry.
GOAT race started in 2008 when all three were peak at same time. Federer winning before Nadal and Djokovic were even fully mature is not relevant to a GOAT discussion. Wimbledon 2008 was defining. I loved Djokovic beating Federer in 2 Wimbledon finals as well as it does make it debatable if Djokovic wins Wimbledon again this year as to who is better on grass especially if he schools Federer again on the way.Lol 3rd wheel of 2003-2012 era when he won 17 slams most time at number 1, most consecutive weeks, 5 in a row Wimbledon USO etc LOL.
3rd of the 2011-2019 era definitely. Not bad for 30-37 year old.
“Peak” Fed in 2014 2015... hilarious. Keep up this trolling.
There’s no way you’re posting this seriously. Not even worth responding to this trolling mess.GOAT race started in 2008 when all three were peak at same time. Federer winning before Nadal and Djokovic were even fully mature is not relevant to a GOAT discussion. Wimbledon 2008 was defining. I loved Djokovic beating Federer in 2 Wimbledon finals as well as it does make it debatable if Djokovic wins Wimbledon again this year as to who is better on grass especially if he schools Federer again on the way.
When the best are compared it is by how they fared when they were competing t same time at their best. Your argument is like comparing Senna to Shumacher.There’s no way you’re posting this seriously. Not even worth responding to this trolling mess.
Federer’s best was from 2004-2009. With some flashes of top play in 2010-2012.When the best are compared it is by how they fared when they were competing t same time at their best. Your argument is like comparing Senna to Shumacher.
are you serious lol. in 2009 he was 27!!!!!Federer’s best was from 2004-2009. With some flashes of top play in 2010-2012.
outside of Australia it is Nadal 9-4 Djokovic. Major count for 2 guys the same age is 18-15 Nadal...Nadal more Masters 1000...……..
Nadal has a winning h2h v Djokovic at the majors and multiple slams on all surfaces...….
He is the third wheel of this era. sorry.
Facts are what matter not probables lol. Nadal now out on his own as leader of Major count at his age and counting. Leader in h2hs where it matters...and the only all surface great this era.Ned devotees hinking a guy who spent the majority of his career ranked number 2 be the Greatest of All Time? In what other sport has this ever occurred? And has less slams, less wtf, less masters, less olympics, inferior h2h than other peer players in his era
Humiliated 7-0 7-0 by main rival and probably will be again and is GOAT