Federer:"Nadal and Murray more defensive,Novak and i are more attacking players

[Goosehead]

Lol I love this controversy about nothing. When you look closely, what Fed actually says is that all 4 are great attacking players and all 4 are great defensive players. He sure is going out on a limb with that stuff :lol:

lol..good old internet forums. always something going on. even if its a big argument over nothing. :lol::grin:

 

[powerangle]

I like all of the "Big 4" and I don't completely agree with Fed's statement here. Sure, Novak is probably more aggressive than Nadal and Murray overall, but he isn't nearly as aggressive as Federer on a consistent basis.

If I had to rate them in terms of aggressive/attacking play on a 100-point scale:

Federer: 85 avg (60-95 depending on the day)

Djokovic: 55 avg (30-90 depending on the day...90+ in some of his ultra-confident 2011 matches where he was just whaling on the ball and never seemed to miss...30 for those holy s**t passive lethargic days)

Nadal: 45 avg (15-ish for those looping moon ball matches when he's not confident...up to maybe 90 as well during some of his peak US Open 2010 matches)

Murray: 40 avg (10-75...I give him a 75 when he decides to go for it with his slap-happy FHs)

 

[above bored]

Well, Fed knows tennis much better than you and played against these players, so with all due respect, I would take his judgement over yours.

A couple of things. Federer only plays against Djokovic, he does not watch his matches against the rest of the tour. Djokovic plays differently when he plays against Federer, compared to when he plays others. He has to play differently otherwise Federer's aggression will run him ragged. So he tries to play more aggressively himself to counter Federer's aggression. This may be part of the reason Federer used Djokovic's name and attacking in the same sentence.

Federer has this effect against all opponents. Nadal, Murray, Ferrer, Simon etc. All of them play a little more aggressively when they play Federer. When they play between themselves is when you get the 30 stroke rallies, but not against Federer because his attacking style forces them to be more aggressive than they ordinarily would. Despite this however, Djokovic is more aggressive than Nadal and Murray, but he is not an attacking player, in spite of what Federer says. Attacking players do not habitually engage in the wars of attrition Djokovic typically does, in particular against other counter- punchers like Nadal, Murray and Ferrer.

Lastly, Federer is just making general broad comments and being diplomatic with it. He does not get into specifics. Aside from it being blatantly obvious, he is on record, in a post match interview some years ago, noting that he and Djokovic played the game very differently.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Why? Et tu Brute again? :roll:

Nadal is better defensive player and retriever. That, beside luck and help from officials, help him win some matches vs Novak. Not because he is "better big match player". What a ridiculous notion, and what is even worse from a supposed Novak fan.

Man, what kind of crazy voodoo obsession spell did someone put on you? You are literally only capable of seeing everything one way, and it all involves incredible delusion.

only nadal can play defense and win against federer, djoko realized this thats why he's more agressive against federer. letting federer dictate is a losing stragtegy. this year us open novak said that he likes to drag out the point more even though he has easy winners, and that's why he hired Becker to help him finish point faster.

djokovic can play offense but thats his secondary tactic, he's a defensive player.

IMO Nadal is more of a shotmaker as he is able to hit winners from impossible position in that category he is very much like federer. these days nadal is even more aggressive.

Boom.

 

[Chico]

Djokovic is not an attacking player. He is more aggressive than Nadal and Murray, but not as aggressive as Federer. I would call him an aggressive counter-puncher, but certainly not an attacking player.

What you would call him is meaningless and irrelevant. Federer himself said it: Djokovic is offensive shotmaker and everyone with at least two brain cells will take Federer's opinion over yours.

 

[kandamrgam]

Djokovic is not an attacking player. He is more aggressive than Nadal and Murray, but not as aggressive as Federer. I would call him an aggressive counter-puncher, but certainly not an attacking player.

This

I like all of the "Big 4" and I don't completely agree with Fed's statement here. Sure, Novak is probably more aggressive than Nadal and Murray overall, but he isn't nearly as aggressive as Federer on a consistent basis.

If I had to rate them in terms of aggressive/attacking play on a 100-point scale:

Federer: 85 avg (60-95 depending on the day)

Djokovic: 55 avg (30-90 depending on the day...90+ in some of his ultra-confident 2011 matches where he was just whaling on the ball and never seemed to miss...30 for those holy s**t passive lethargic days)

Nadal: 45 avg (15-ish for those looping moon ball matches when he's not confident...up to maybe 90 as well during some of his peak US Open 2010 matches)

Murray: 40 avg (10-75...I give him a 75 when he decides to go for it with his slap-happy FHs)

And this.

 

[Chico]

I like all of the "Big 4" and I don't completely agree with Fed's statement here. Sure, Novak is probably more aggressive than Nadal and Murray overall, but he isn't nearly as aggressive as Federer on a consistent basis.

If I had to rate them in terms of aggressive/attacking play on a 100-point scale:

Federer: 85 avg (60-95 depending on the day)

Djokovic: 55 avg (30-90 depending on the day...90+ in some of his ultra-confident 2011 matches where he was just whaling on the ball and never seemed to miss...30 for those holy s**t passive lethargic days)

Nadal: 45 avg (15-ish for those looping moon ball matches when he's not confident...up to maybe 90 as well during some of his peak US Open 2010 matches)

Murray: 40 avg (10-75...I give him a 75 when he decides to go for it with his slap-happy FHs)

Nonsense. Djokovic is 70-75 on this scale. At least. Why do people spew nonsense like this? Do you think you know more than Federer?

 

[Chico]

only nadal can play defense and win against federer, djoko realized this thats why he's more agressive against federer. letting federer dictate is a losing stragtegy. this year us open novak said that he likes to drag out the point more even though he has easy winners, and that's why he hired Becker to help him finish point faster.

djokovic can play offense but thats his secondary tactic, he's a defensive player.

IMO Nadal is more of a shotmaker as he is able to hit winners from impossible position in that category he is very much like federer. these days nadal is even more aggressive.

Another delusional hater. As said, I would take Federer's opinion over your htefull fanboy rant any day.

Djokovic is offensive shotmaker and there is nothing you can do about it except to post nonsense here.

Unbelievable

 

[Netspirit]

I would take Djokovic's opinion over Federer's.

http://youtu.be/jgxrD1iT9lY?t=44s - interview after beating Wawrinka at the AO 2013.

Q. You're one of the fittest players on tour. Some of your serving stats have been getting better. Do you feel you're running less on the court than maybe in years past?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: I don't know. You tell me. You know the stats better (smiling). I haven't really...

Q. How does it feel?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: ...Obviously I had to run. I had to run a lot... Really depends. Of course I do want to use the first shot more efficiently. I want to be more aggressive the first shot after serve and after return. I want to try to get into the court and dominate the rally, dominate the play. That's the goal, you know. It's something I have been working on. Obviously I know that I have a good defense game and I can, you know, get the balls, an extra ball back and make the opponent play extra shot. But, you know, why spend so much energy if I can actually execute my shots in first two, three shots of the point better.

Djokovic is widely known as a textbook baseline grinder. It is easy to see who is more and less offensive by how far behind the baseline they play; there are 4 stages:

1. Murray, Nadal and Djokovic are all defensive baseliners. They pretty much personify the grinding style of 00s. Each has a monster stamina, low UE count, good serve return. Yes, they all do hit winners at times, but only because they are top 4 after all, not entirely one-dimensional. Djokovic is perhaps more offensive than Ferrer, but he is still a defensive player. Monfils and Simon are also in this group.

2. Offensive baseliners are guys like Berdych, Del Potro, Soderling. They are tall and strong - they need to hit winners from far away. They prefer to keep the points short, as they do not move very well. Isner and Raonic are in this group too, despite their huge serves - they actually do rally and have decent forehands.

3. Dimitrov, Dolgopolov, Federer are all-court players - some gravitate to the baseline more (Wawrinka), some rush the net more (Federer). This group has good slices, volleys, overheads, dropshots - they need to mix their shots up to compensate for the lack of stamina or power.

4. Llodra and Stakhovsky are S&V players. Federer was a S&V player before 2002.

...And finally, here is my fancy theory on why Djokovic's fans are so defensive about Djokovic's defensive game, and so insecure when someone brings up Djokovic's insecurity.

It is an Eastern European thing. "Offensive" does not just sound better/bolder, it implies active/masculine while "defensive" implies passive/feminine. Calling Djokovic "defensive" - according to his fans - is a subtle way to demean him and his legacy by finding him less of a macho.

Djokovic, according to his fans, has no weaknesses and no fear, so why does he need to "defend" when he can "offend" his opponent - tactically, athletically, rectally - you name it.

 

[RFGOAT1992]

Another delusional hater. As said, I would take Federer's opinion over your htefull fanboy rant any day.

Djokovic is offensive shotmaker and there is nothing you can do about it except to post nonsense here.

Unbelievable

no hating here, your just a fanboy trying to hype your idol. look up shotmaking. he might be offensive player but he's not a shotmaker.

what federer said is what he feels when they play. but against everyone else djoko is defensive

 

[jg153040]

Guys seriously, you think that 17 GS champion doesn't know about stuff like that?

This is not some subjective stuff, this is about tennis. And Federer is actually playing Djokovic, none of you guys do.

It's like saying Federer doesn't know about spin.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Another delusional hater. As said, I would take Federer's opinion over your htefull fanboy rant any day.

Djokovic is offensive shotmaker and there is nothing you can do about it except to post nonsense here.

Unbelievable

You need to seriously calm down before you get banned.

 

[RFGOAT1992]

Guys seriously, you think that 17 GS champion doesn't know about stuff like that?

This is not some subjective stuff, this is about tennis. And Federer is actually playing Djokovic, none of you guys do.

It's like saying Federer doesn't know about spin.

not saying federer dont know his stuff, just saying djoko pretty much only plays aggressive offense when he plays federer.

through and through he's a wall

 

[furryballs]

You need to seriously calm down before you get banned.

i agree with both Micheal and Chico on this

 

[MichaelNadal]

not saying federer dont know his stuff, just saying djoko pretty much only plays aggressive offense when he plays federer.

through and through he's a wall

More of a wall than a shotmaker, like I said. But I think he's aggressive and offensive when he plays most guys. He just uses his defense to an equal measure. I don't think that makes him a defensive player.

 

[furryballs]

Guys seriously, you think that 17 GS champion doesn't know about stuff like that?

This is not some subjective stuff, this is about tennis. And Federer is actually playing Djokovic, none of you guys do.

It's like saying Federer doesn't know about spin.

this isnt about life and death! ITS FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT!

 

[RFGOAT1992]

More of a wall than a shotmaker, like I said. But I think he's aggressive and offensive when he plays most guys. He just uses his defense to an equal measure. I don't think that makes him a defensive player.

thats all im saying, he even said a couple times he prefer defense, and prefer to drag out points then win outright.(cant prove this tho, just remember it) he's capable of offense tho

 

[clayqueen]

Why? Et tu Brute again? :roll:

Nadal is better defensive player and retriever. That, beside luck and help from officials, help him win some matches vs Novak. Not because he is "better big match player". What a ridiculous notion, and what is even worse from a supposed Novak fan.

Not a blind one.

 

[jg153040]

this isnt about life and death! ITS FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT!

Sad, but true. We are more worried how those rich people are doing than about other problems in the world .

 

[clayqueen]

Nadal likes to build up towards winning the points that's why he doesn't often go for the kill straight away. He believes that strategy is very important in tennis and thinks just trying to hit winners is boring. All the youtube clips of best points are long rallies not 1, 2 winners.

Murray, on the other hand, waits for his opponents to make mistakes whilst Nadal builds up to hitting a winner when he knows he is 99% sure of winning the point. Nadal can turn defense to offence whenever he wants. Nadal manipulates the rally to when he can hit his 'fearhand' which often guarantees him the point unless on rare occasions when he commits an error or his opponent gets it back.

Djokovic defends the baseline. That's his main strategy , whether it's by being offensive or defensive. Djokovic is at sea if he needs to go to the net or play an overhead, because his main strength is hitting the ball with accuracy from the baseline.

Federer is an instinctive player. He does whatever he needs to do at any given time in the rally. If he is fed balls by his opponent with no pace then he is in his elements. The trouble he has with Nadal, as he has said himself, is that Nadal's style is unique and hard to cope with.

It is not good or bad to play offensive or defensive. The bottom line is to win the point however the player feels comfortable.

Nadal's Fearhand

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Another delusional hater. As said, I would take Federer's opinion over your htefull fanboy rant any day.

Djokovic is offensive shotmaker and there is nothing you can do about it except to post nonsense here.

Unbelievable

Nice profile picture.

One of my favourite things about Djokovic or any applicable player is their shows of emotion.
I love it when Djoker roars, or Nadal fist-pumps, and it is even more special when Federer does it because he usually doesn't.

It makes them seem so human, and so alive.
This is why I watch tennis. That and beautiful shot-making (of which Djokovic is capable, even if he doesn't usually do it IMO).

 

[jg153040]

Clayqueen, I can give you reasons why it's better to play offensive.

It means you will expend less energy, so you will be fitter in finals and entire year.

Second important part is you will have less injuries, so that is good for your longevity and winning titles.

I think Fed's offensive style is a huge advantage and has given him those incredible records.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Clayqueen, I can give you reasons why it's better to play offensive.

It means you will expend less energy, so you will be fitter in finals and entire year.

Second important part is you will have less injuries, so that is good for your longevity and winning titles.

I think Fed's offensive style is a huge advantage and has given him those incredible records.

Yes. Especially these days, where Fed's shortening of points is helping him stay fresh for longer.

 

[clayqueen]

Clayqueen, I can give you reasons why it's better to play offensive.

It means you will expend less energy, so you will be fitter in finals and entire year.

Second important part is you will have less injuries, so that is good for your longevity and winning titles.

I think Fed's offensive style is a huge advantage and has given him those incredible records.

I think even Nadal has come to realize that so he plays more offensively now and tries to shorten the points.

 

[jg153040]

Yes. Especially these days, where Fed's shortening of points is helping him stay fresh for longer.

Yeah, Agassi did the same helping his longevity.

I mean, you can't be nr.2 and make slam finals at an old age with defensive style.

Body can't sustain it.

I'm surprised Sampras didn't have longevity. His game was build for it too. But, I guess it were motivational factors. He didn't love tennis so much, so he said he was mentally drained. He love winning more than tennis. He said he didn't have one night of peaceful sleep in his career. Also he was anti-social and probably media took a lot out of him.

Federer loves it in the media and actually thrives on it. I think this is also a huge aspect, why Federer did so much. Also, I feel he just loves tennis. He said he was hitting the ball against the wall as a child all days. He loves is even more than winning, so this helps with motivation and mentality.

 

[jg153040]

I think even Nadal has come to realize that so he plays more offensively now and tries to shorten the points.

That's true. And I love to see this in Nadal. It was joy to watch him in 2013.

I was surprised he didn't do this sooner. He seems to have the ability. But, I guess when you are winning so much, you don't want to mess with your game.

I remember seeing his early days, he was offensive. But, I guess court speed is slower, so it's hard to do that. I think there are limits to what you can do.

Also he doesn't have great serve to help him. Actually I think his serve is big key. But he also improved his serve. But I guess there are limits to what you can do. You compete all year and you don't have the time to work on new stuff. His style was ingrained, so you can't mess with it and risk it.

Fed explained it once. If you go work on your weaknesses, then you take time away from your strengths, so yeah your weakness is better, but then you aren't dangerous anymore. In tennis Nadal has a lot of work to even maintain his forehand, so even harder to improve.

But hey, I would grind too if it got me even 1 slam. You win 1 slam and you are set for life, financially too. 1 slam is better than potential longevity.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Yeah, Agassi did the same helping his longevity.

I mean, you can't be nr.2 and make slam finals at an old age with defensive style.

Body can't sustain it.

I'm surprised Sampras didn't have longevity. His game was build for it too. But, I guess it were motivational factors. He didn't love tennis so much, so he said he was mentally drained. He love winning more than tennis. He said he didn't have one night of peaceful sleep in his career. Also he was anti-social and probably media took a lot out of him.

Federer loves it in the media and actually thrives on it. I think this is also a huge aspect, why Federer did so much. Also, I feel he just loves tennis. He said he was hitting the ball against the wall as a child all days. He loves is even more than winning, so this helps with motivation and mentality.

Federer does love tennis. He loves the sport and the lifestyle.
He lives and breathes tennis.
He is tennis.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

That's true. And I love to see this in Nadal. It was joy to watch him in 2013.

Their RG, Montreal, USO matches were excellent.
I was glued to the screen.

 

[jg153040]

Their RG, Montreal, USO matches were excellent.
I was glued to the screen.

Yeah me too.

I was loving FO 14 final. Djokovic was playing so well, I thought it would be good, be he still came up short. Awesome quality.

 

[clayqueen]

That's true. And I love to see this in Nadal. It was joy to watch him in 2013.

I was surprised he didn't do this sooner. He seems to have the ability. But, I guess when you are winning so much, you don't want to mess with your game.

I remember seeing his early days, he was offensive. But, I guess court speed is slower, so it's hard to do that. I think there are limits to what you can do.

Also he doesn't have great serve to help him. Actually I think his serve is big key. But he also improved his serve. But I guess there are limits to what you can do. You compete all year and you don't have the time to work on new stuff. His style was ingrained, so you can't mess with it and risk it.

Fed explained it once. If you go work on your weaknesses, then you take time away from your strengths, so yeah your weakness is better, but then you aren't dangerous anymore. In tennis Nadal has a lot of work to even maintain his forehand, so even harder to improve.

But hey, I would grind too if it got me even 1 slam. You win 1 slam and you are set for life, financially too. 1 slam is better than potential longevity.

Up to say, 2010, Nadal's serve wasn't a weapon he just used it to start the point. Now it is. Whilst he doesn't serve a lot of aces he uses placement very effectively. In fact, I would say he serves as many aces as anyone barring the serve machines as in Karlovic. Isner, Raonic and to a lesser extent Delpo plus some up and coming giants.

Nadal's game is the most appealing to me. You feel you are watching a competition; you feel his passion as if it's you who is on the court.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

It's interesting that the two bigger guys Murray (who's probably the strongest/biggest) and Nadal are the defensive ones while the skinny Fed (At least he's broad sideways) and the fashion model thin Djoko are the attackers.

A lot of Nadal's musculature goes into his spin and it obviously works for him, but I always felt that Murray wasted his strength and size completely.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

It's interesting that the two bigger guys Murray (who's probably the strongest/biggest) and Nadal are the defensive ones while the skinny Fed (At least he's broad sideways) and the fashion model thin Djoko are the attackers.

A lot of Nadal's musculature goes into his spin and it obviously works for him, but I always felt that Murray wasted his strength and size completely.

Murral are bigger, but Djokovic isn't skinny.
He has the best/most athletic build of any tennis player I have ever seen.
His conditioning is ridiculous, thus his consistency is also.

Fed's naturally broad shoulders would put some NFL players to shame.

 

[Noelan]

Murray bulked a lot in the last couple of years, before that he was thin almost like Novak and hes just 1 inch taller , imo that cost him back injury.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Murral are bigger, but Djokovic isn't skinny.
He has the best/most athletic build of any tennis player I have ever seen.
His conditioning is ridiculous, thus his consistency is also.

Fed's naturally broad shoulders would put some NFL players to shame.

Agreed, I think Djoko is the best athlete and I would describe his body as lean lithe and muscular. But he is thinner than Murray, especially in the legs.

 

[syc23]

Murray bulked a lot in the last couple of years, before that he was thin almost like Novak and hes just 1 inch taller , imo that cost him back injury.

Changing physically also bought AM 2 slams and Olympic Gold.

 

[Noelan]

Agreed, I think Djoko is the best athlete and I would describe his body as lean lithe and muscular. But he is thinner than Murray, especially in the legs.

Yes, Murray always had a tick legs.

 

[Noelan]

Changing physically also bought AM 2 slams and Olympic Gold.

Probably, that is the price.

 

[clayqueen]

Until you see these guys in the flesh, you are just guessing. Nadal is NOT big, I can assure you. He is very well proportioned and taller than he looks on TV and Nole does look thin in person. Murray is the tallest and well built although his legs are quite trunky. Fed is tall and well proportioned too.

I've been to AD a few times and there you really get to see the players close up. Also in Dubai and Doha although I've never seen Rafa in Dubai because he stopped playing there when I had the opportunity to go to Dubai since late 2008.

 

[Noelan]

Yeah right, Nadal isn't big with his thick legs , big arms and huge backside and hes taller than he looks at TV, only in your delusional world.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Yeah right, Nadal isn't big with his thick legs , big arms and huge backside and hes taller than he looks at TV, only in your delusional world.

Nadal has a ghetto booty fo sho

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Until you see these guys in the flesh, you are just guessing. Nadal is NOT big, I can assure you. He is very well proportioned and taller than he looks on TV and Nole does look thin in person. Murray is the tallest and well built although his legs are quite trunky. Fed is tall and well proportioned too.

I've been to AD a few times and there you really get to see the players close up. Also in Dubai and Doha although I've never seen Rafa in Dubai because he stopped playing there when I had the opportunity to go to Dubai since late 2008.

I was at the AO this year and saw several of Nadal's matches.
He is a big guy.

Federer is a lot larger than he looks on TV too.

 

[clayqueen]

Yeah right, Nadal isn't big with his thick legs , big arms and huge backside and hes taller than he looks at TV, only in your delusional world.

The difference between you and I is that I have seen him at close quarters and you haven't. I was only a few feet away from him at the pressers in Abu Dhabi last year.

It's no wonder that it's Nadal and non of the others who is targeted to model and promote tennis.

Nadal, the hero of the global campaign, Vivo

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Yeah right, Nadal isn't big with his thick legs , big arms and huge backside and hes taller than he looks at TV, only in your delusional world.

His shorts get lost in there!

 

[clayqueen]

It's interesting that the two bigger guys Murray (who's probably the strongest/biggest) and Nadal are the defensive ones while the skinny Fed (At least he's broad sideways) and the fashion model thin Djoko are the attackers.

A lot of Nadal's musculature goes into his spin and it obviously works for him, but I always felt that Murray wasted his strength and size completely.

Fashion model Djoko???

How come Nadal gets the modelling jobs?

 

[Djokovic2011]

Fashion model Djoko???

How come Nadal gets the modelling jobs?

You obviously completely misunderstood 125's sentence. He was saying that Nole is as thin as a model, not that he looks like one.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

You obviously completely misunderstood 125's sentence. He was saying that Nole is as thin as a model, not that he looks like one.

Thank You. Thought it was rather simple... :lol:

 

[clayqueen]

You obviously completely misunderstood 125's sentence. He was saying that Nole is as thin as a model, not that he looks like one.

 

[jg153040]

Up to say, 2010, Nadal's serve wasn't a weapon he just used it to start the point. Now it is. Whilst he doesn't serve a lot of aces he uses placement very effectively. In fact, I would say he serves as many aces as anyone barring the serve machines as in Karlovic. Isner, Raonic and to a lesser extent Delpo plus some up and coming giants.

Nadal's game is the most appealing to me. You feel you are watching a competition; you feel his passion as if it's you who is on the court.

Also side spin is his biggest weapon in serve. So, the ball will come back slower and where he wants, so he can dictate the point then. He uses this so well.

Strange how Fed is amazing returner vs great servers, but he has a lot of problems with Nadal lefty side spin serve.

Well, I like all sorts of players. Variety is the key. You know what they say, too much love will kill you. That applies for tennis too. Sure, watching Fed on grass is amazing, but I wouldn't want that to be all the time. I love pizza, but I don't want to eat it all the time.

So, it's great to see some clay grinding. I love it all. Short rallies, net play, medium rallies, long rallies. Ace feasts.

As long as it's balanced. I want more faster surfaces, but that doesn't mean I want more slower. Balance. I would love to see indoor slam. And faster grass. But AO and FO should remain the same.

 

[jg153040]

Murral are bigger, but Djokovic isn't skinny.
He has the best/most athletic build of any tennis player I have ever seen.
His conditioning is ridiculous, thus his consistency is also.

Fed's naturally broad shoulders would put some NFL players to shame.

It's hard to tell who is skinny or not. Because muscle and bone density can have a lot of effect on your mass.

You can look skinnier and yet you can be physically stronger.

One pound of muscle is heavier than one pound of fat .

 

[Deleted member 716271]

It's hard to tell who is skinny or not. Because muscle and bone density can have a lot of effect on your mass.

You can look skinnier and yet you can be physically stronger.

One pound of muscle is heavier than one pound of fat .

Oh god...same infantile, it's all a wash, relativist logic on every damn thread.

In that example, the guy would be skinny AND strong. Logic really is not your strong suit, but you talk as if you were an expert. Very dangerous combination.