Federer, Sampras, and dealing with decline

[abmk]

Granted, those were hyperboles and if someone had taken me to task, I would have retracted after looking at the data in plain sight.

I am basically a 39 year old professional. If you expect me to be a typical “fanboy” that I am not. It is clear that arguing against juveniles whose harmones are raging and do not find a suitable “landing place” is a massive waste of time.

those aren't hyperboles. Those are statements made to suit your convenience. No, you are a not a typical fanboy. Atleast those kind are straight forward. You are a manipulator/liar in the vein of RF-18 and you are being exposed badly, completely.

what do you mean you would have retracted after looking at the data in plain sight ? You didn't even f**** know whom all Nadal faced at the USO in 10/13 before the finals, let alone watching those matches/checking the stats/reading a summary of those matches ?

and even then you make such statements saying Nadal vultured those USOs (when it is convenient for you ) and now you say he didn't (in another argument, where it is convenient for you)?

LOL !!!!!!!

you are not fooling anyone with half decent brain.

 

[zagor]

Nadal is 10-22 in non-clay finals against top 10 players. Yet, here we are blissfully awarding him three non-clay slams in a row, and just assuming he would beat the likes of Murray/Federer on slow/fast hc and also Tsonga/Federer on grass.

The advantage of inconsistency, people just remember the highs.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

So, humor me.

I said: Djokovic's defeats of Nadal were more impactful than his defeats of Federer.

Where is the fanboy bit?

I have said nowhere Djokovic is greater than either Fedal.

I am comparing 2 different rivalries. In fact the position that Djokovic hurt Federer "more" lessens Federer's achievements. I am saying Djokovic beat an old Federer and that's not as impactful as him beating the young bull. This position is consistent for a Fed fan.

Don't feel bad though. 99 percent or more humans fail at interpretation and comprehension. How is that number for another stat?

I often wonder with your type of trolling: you wake up in the morning and say to yourself " What a beautiful day! I am gonna go extra hard", or is it more like " Ooouf, another day at the office. Let's get the ball rolling."?

 

[abmk]

Nadal is 10-22 in non-clay finals against top 10 players. Yet, here we are blissfully awarding him three non-clay slams in a row, and just assuming he would beat the likes of Murray/Federer on slow/fast hc and also Tsonga/Federer on grass.

good one.
Also, it'd have to be 5 slams in a row, RG11 to RG 12. Yeah, in la la land !

 

[fedfan39]

those aren't hyperboles. Those are statements made to suit your convenience. No, you are a not a typical fanboy. Atleast those kind are straight forward. You are a manipulator/liar in the vein of RF-18 and you are being exposed badly, completely.

what do you mean you would have retracted after looking at the data in plain sight ? You didn't even f**** know whom all Nadal faced at the USO in 10/13 before the finals, let alone watching those matches/checking the stats/reading a summary of those matches ?

and even then you make such statements saying Nadal vultured those USOs (when it is convenient for you ) and now you say he didn't (in another argument, where it is convenient for you)?

LOL !!!!!!!

you are not fooling anyone with half decent brain.

Dude...slow down.

Take a deep breath.

Don't get worked up and kick that poor cat.

There are no conspiracies in the world.

I don't have an agenda.

Get your mental health checked because you sound angry about something.

Whatever you say. You are right. I am wrong.

Take care.

 

[fedfan39]

I often wonder with your type of trolling: you wake up in the morning and say to yourself " What a beautiful day! I am gonna go extra hard", or is it more like " Ooouf, another day at the office. Let's get the ball rolling."?

This kind of trolling is called having a different opinion.

Good day!

 

[abmk]

Dude...slow down.

Take a deep breath.

Don't get worked up and kick that poor cat.

There are no conspiracies in the world.

I don't have an agenda.

Get your mental health checked because you sound angry about something.

Whatever you say. You are right. I am wrong.

Take care.

yes, you do have an agenda.

My mental health is fine. Yes, I'm being aggressive in my posts to you, because its obvious to me that you are a lying, manipulative troll. I don't reply that way to normal, decent posters. Is that explanation sound enough ?

also there were 2 clear questions over there.

"what do you mean you would have retracted after looking at the data in plain sight ? You didn't even f**** know whom all Nadal faced at the USO in 10/13 before the finals, let alone watching those matches/checking the stats/reading a summary of those matches ?"

obviously no answers from you

 

[Tennis_Hands]

This kind of trolling is called having a different opinion.

Good day!

Yeah, sure, lol.

 

[JackGates]

The advantage of inconsistency, people just remember the highs.

Yeah, sort of like horoscope, people just remember hits and not the misses.

 

[Tornes]

So, humor me.

I said: Djokovic's defeats of Nadal were more impactful than his defeats of Federer.

Where is the fanboy bit?

I have said nowhere Djokovic is greater than either Fedal.

I am comparing 2 different rivalries. In fact the position that Djokovic hurt Federer "more" lessens Federer's achievements. I am saying Djokovic beat an old Federer and that's not as impactful as him beating the young bull. This position is consistent for a Fed fan.

Don't feel bad though. 99 percent or more humans fail at interpretation and comprehension. How is that number for another stat?

Well not all losses to Djokovic are from 2014 an after that. Fed lost to Djoker also in 2008, 2010, 2011 twice and 2012. Djokovic is the sole reason Federer is not simply the GOAT of 4 out of 5 biggest tennis tournaments.